Jackson v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner
Filing
23
MEMORANDUM OPINION - After careful consideration of the record in this case, the magistrate judges report and recommendation, and the claimants objections, the court OVERRULES all objections, ADOPTS the magistrate judges report, and ACCEPTS his recommendation. The court finds that the decision of the Commissioner should be AFFIRMED. The court will enter a separate Final Order in conformity with this Memorandum Opinion. Signed by Chief Judge Karon O Bowdre on 9/20/2018. (KEK)
FILED
2018 Sep-20 AM 09:42
U.S. DISTRICT COURT
N.D. OF ALABAMA
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
MIDDLE DIVISION
SHARIESE JACKSON,
Claimant,
v.
COMMISSIONER, SOCIAL SECURITY
ADMINISTRATION,
Respondent.
)
)
)
)
) Case No. 4:16-cv-1329-KOB
)
)
)
)
)
MEMORANDUM OPINION
On June 20, 2018, the magistrate judge entered a report recommending that the
court affirm the Commissioner’s decision. (Doc. 18). The claimant filed objections
on July 20, 2018. (Doc. 20). For the following reasons, the court OVERRULES all
objections, ACCEPTS and ADOPTS the report and recommendation, and will
AFFIRM the Commissioner’s decision.
First, the claimant states that the ALJ erred in giving little weight to Dr. Iyer’s
consulting opinion. The court OVERRULES that objection. The claimant fails to
point out any specific error of law or fact in the magistrate judge’s report and
recommendation. Instead, she disagrees with the magistrate judge’s recommendation
on that issue and block quotes cases with absolutely no analysis and fails to show how
those quotes apply to her objection. The court agrees with the magistrate judge that
the ALJ did not err in giving Dr. Iyer’s opinion little weight and that substantial
evidence supports the ALJ’s reasons for that weight.
In her second objection, the claimant asserts that res judicata prevents the ALJ
from changing her finding regarding the weight she gave Dr. Iyer’s opinion in the
second ALJ decision. The court also OVERRULES that objection. The claimant
cites 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.987 and 404.989 to support her argument. However, that
section deals with “re-opening” an opinion, not what the ALJ can do after an Appeals
Council remand. The magistrate judge correctly and thoroughly explained the correct
C.F.R. section and case law on this issue in his report. The court agrees with the
magistrate judge that the ALJ was not bound by her findings in her first decision after
the Appeals Council remanded the case to her and directed her to write a new
opinion.
After careful consideration of the record in this case, the magistrate judge’s
report and recommendation, and the claimant’s objections, the court OVERRULES
all objections, ADOPTS the magistrate judge’s report, and ACCEPTS his
recommendation. The court finds that the decision of the Commissioner should be
AFFIRMED.
The court will enter a separate Final Order in conformity with this
Memorandum Opinion.
DONE and ORDERED this 20th day of September, 2018.
____________________________________
KARON OWEN BOWDRE
2
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
3
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?