Wells v. Commissioner of Social Security et al
Filing
24
OPINION AND ORDER accepting and adopting 23 Report and Recommendations. The Decision of the Commissioner is affirmed. The Clerk shall enter judgment accordingly and close the file. Signed by Judge John E. Steele on 3/17/2014. (RKR)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
FORT MYERS DIVISION
STACY M. WELLS,
Plaintiff,
vs.
Case No.
2:12-cv-91-FtM-29DNF
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,
Defendant.
___________________________________
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on consideration of Magistrate
Douglas N. Frazier’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. #23), filed on
February 11, 2014, recommending that the Commissioner’s decision to
deny
social
security
disability
benefits
be
affirmed.
No
objections have been filed, and the time to do so has expired.
I.
The Court reviews the Commissioner’s decision to determine if
it is supported by substantial evidence and based upon proper legal
standards.
Crawford v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 363 F.3d 1155, 1158
(11th Cir. 2004) (citing Lewis v. Callahan, 125 F.3d 1436, 1439
(11th Cir. 1997)).
Substantial evidence is more than a scintilla
but less than a preponderance, and is such relevant evidence as a
reasonable person would accept as adequate to support a conclusion.
Moore v. Barnhart, 405 F.3d 1208, 1211 (11th Cir. 2005) (citing
Crawford, 363 F.3d at 1158-59). Even if the evidence preponderates
against the Commissioner’s findings, the Court must affirm if the
decision reached is supported by substantial evidence.
Crawford,
363 F.3d at 1158-59 (citing Martin v. Sullivan, 894 F.2d 1520, 1529
(11th Cir. 1990)).
The Court does not decide facts anew, make
credibility judgments, reweigh the evidence, or substitute its
judgment for that of the Commissioner.
Moore, 405 F.3d at 1211
(citing Bloodsworth v. Heckler, 703 F.2d 1233, 1239 (11th Cir.
1983)); Dyer v. Barnhart, 395 F.3d 1206, 1210 (11th Cir. 2005)
(citing Phillips v. Barnhart, 357 F.3d 1232, 1240 n.8 (11th Cir.
2004)).
The Court reviews the Commissioner’s conclusions of law
under a de novo standard of review.
Ingram v. Comm’r of SSA, 496
F.3d 1253, 1260 (11th Cir. 2007) (citing Martin, 894 F.2d at 1529).
II.
Plaintiff
raised
eight
issues
in
her
appeal
of
the
Commissioner’s adverse decision to the district court. (Doc. #12.)
The
original
Report
and
Recommendation
(Doc.
#20)
found
for
plaintiff on one issue, finding it unnecessary to resolve the other
issues in light of the recommended remand.
Specifically, the
Report and Recommendation found that the Appeals Council failed to
evaluate evidence submitted to it after the Administrative Law
Judge’s
(ALJ)
Commissioner.
decision,
The
thus
requiring
undersigned
a
rejected
remand
the
to
the
Report
and
Recommendation and recommitted the matter to the magistrate judge
to consider the other issues raised by plaintiff.
(Doc. #22.)
The
Magistrate Judge has now submitted a Report and Recommendation
-2-
(Doc. #23) resolving the other issues raised by plaintiff and
recommending that the Decision of the Commissioner be affirmed.
III.
After
extensively
reviewing
the
record
evidence,
the
Magistrate Judge addressed each of the eight issues raised by
plaintiff.
The Magistrate Judge concluded that there was no basis
for reversal of the Commissioner’s decision.
After an independent
review, the Court agrees with the findings and recommendations in
the Report and Recommendation.
Accordingly, it is now
ORDERED:
1.
The Report and Recommendation (Doc. #23) is accepted and
adopted by the Court.
2.
The Decision of the Commissioner of Social Security is
affirmed.
3.
The Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment accordingly
and close the file.
DONE AND ORDERED at Fort Myers, Florida, this
March, 2014.
Copies:
Hon. Douglas N. Frazier
U.S. Magistrate Judge
Counsel of Record
-3-
17th
day of
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?