Flynn v. Social Security Administration Commissioner

Filing 13

JUDGMENT/ORDER AFFIRMING THE DECISION OF THE COMMISSIONER and Plaintiffs case is dismissed with prejudice and adopting the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge as set forth in the 11 Report and Recommendations. Signed by Honorable P. K. Holmes, III on December 13, 2012. (sh)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS HARRISON DIVISION TRACY D. FLYNN v. PLAINTIFF Case No. 3:11-CV-03053 MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner Social Security Administration DEFENDANT JUDGMENT Currently before the Court is the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 11) filed on September 5, 2012, by the Honorable Erin L. Setser, United States Magistrate Judge for the Western District of Arkansas. Also before the Court are Plaintiff’s objections (Doc. 12). Plaintiff objects to the Magistrate’s findings concerning the Administrative Law Judge’s (“ALJ”) determination of her residual functional capacity (“RFC”), maintaining that the ALJ’s findings relative to Plaintiff’s RFC are not supported by substantial evidence. Plaintiff argues the ALJ did not properly consider whether Plaintiff’s alleged pain was intense enough to cause functional limitations. Further, Plaintiff maintains that the Magistrate failed to consider objective findings that Plaintiff has a severe impairment. After reviewing the record de novo as to Plaintiff’s objections, the Court finds the Magistrate’s reasoning to be sound and further finds that Plaintiff’s objections offer neither law nor fact requiring departure from the Magistrates’ findings. As stated by the Magistrate, it does not appear that Plaintiff was prescribed any medications for pain, and there was a period of four years in which Plaintiff claimed to have been experiencing severe pain, yet received no medical care. See Singh v. Apfel, 222 F.3d 448, 452 (8th Cir. 2000) (“a claimant’s allegations of disabling pain may be discredited by evidence that the claimant has received minimal medical treatment and/or has taken only occasional pain medications”). Additionally, Plaintiff’s gait and limb function were found to be normal, and any other physical limitations experienced by Plaintiff were provided for in the ALF’s RFC. Based on the findings of the examining and nonexamining physicians during the relevant time period, there is an absence of objective medical evidence in the record to support Plaintiff’s complaints. Hutton v. Apfel, 175 F.3d 651, 655 (8th Cir. 1999). The ALJ can consider these factors when making an RFC determination, and the Court finds that substantial evidence supports the ALJ’s findings. Therefore, having reviewed this case, and being well and sufficiently advised, the Court finds that the Report and Recommendation is proper and should be and hereby is ADOPTED IN ITS ENTIRETY. Accordingly, the decision of the Administrative Law Judge is AFFIRMED. Plaintiff’s Complaint is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. IT IS SO ORDERED this 13th day of December, 2012. s/P. K. Holmes, III P.K. HOLMES, III CHIEF U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE

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?