DeSoto v. Astrue

Filing 40

ORDER adopting Report and Recommendations re 39 Report and Recommendation. This matter is remanded to the Administrative Law Judge for further consideration consistent with the terms of this Order and the Report and Recommendation. Clerk of Court shall enter judgment and close its file. Signed by Judge Cindy K Jorgenson on 8/13/2013.(BAR)

DeSoto v. Colvin

Doc. 40

1
2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

8
9

Anthony Martin DeSoto,
Plaintiff,

10
11

ORDER

v.

12

No. CV-12-00321-TUC-CKJ

Carolyn W. Colvin, Acting Commissioner
of Social Security Administration,

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26

Defendant.
On July 18, 2013, Magistrate Judge D. Thomas Ferraro issued a Report and
Recommendation, (Doc. 39), in which he recommended that this Court remand the case
to the Administrative Law Judge1 (“ALJ”).
Specifically, Magistrate Judge Ferraro recommended that the case be remanded to
the ALJ because the ALJ erred in rejecting the opinion of Dr. Shapiro without providing
specific, legitimate reasons, the ALJ’s credibility finding with respect to Plaintiff’s foot
deformity was not based on clear and convincing evidence, the ALJ failed to provide
clear and convincing reasons to discount Plaintiff’s allegations of fatigue, and the ALJ
committed error when he rejected Plaintiff’s mother’s testimony without providing a
specific reason for doing so.
Magistrate Judge Ferraro recommends that the case be remanded to the ALJ for
further development of the case and reconsideration of the evidence from Dr. Shapiro and
Plaintiff’s credibility, with respect to the impairment of his feet and his fatigue. Further,

27
28

1

The Court notes that the Report and Recommendation incorrectly referred to the
Administrative Law Judge using the masculine pronoun “he.”

Dockets.Justia.com

1

the ALJ must reconsider Plaintiff’s residual functional capacity and his consideration at

2

Steps Four and Five of the required analysis, including gathering additional vocational

3

expert testimony if warranted. See C.F.R. §§404.920(a)(4), 416.1520(a)(4); Heckler v.

4

Campbell, 461 U.S. 458, 460-462 (1983).

5
6

No objections have been filed within the time provided by Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 72(b)(2).

7

Accordingly, after an independent review, IT IS ORDERED:

8

1.

The Report and Recommendation (Doc. 39) is ADOPTED.

9

2.

This matter is remanded to the Administrative Law Judge for further

10

consideration consistent with the terms of this Order and the Report and

11

Recommendation, (Doc. 39).

12

3.

The Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment in this matter and close its file.

13

Dated this 13th day of August, 2013.

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

-2-