Bethel v. Saul

Filing 23

ORDER Adopting 22 Report and Recommendation and Granting Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment. Closing Case. Motions Terminated: 18 Plaintiff's MOTION for Summary Judgment with Supporting Memorandum of Law filed by Mary Bethel, 22 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 19 Defendant's MOTION for Summary Judgment with Supporting Memorandum of Law filed by Andrew M. Saul, 18 Plaintiff's MOTION for Summary Judgment with Supporting Memorand um of Law filed by M, 19 Defendant's MOTION for Summary Judgment with Supporting Memorandum of Law filed by Andrew M. Saul. Signed by Judge Federico A. Moreno on 9/8/2020. See attached document for full details. (mmc)

Case 0:19-cv-62071-FAM Document 23 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/08/2020 Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
Fort Lauderdale Division
Case Number: 19-62071-CIV-MORENO
MARY BETHEL,
Plaintiff,
vs.
ANDREW M. SAUL, Acting Commissioner of
Social Security,
Defendant.
_________________________________________/
ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
THE MATTER was referred to the Honorable Jared M. Strauss, United States Magistrate
Judge, for a Report and Recommendation on Plaintiff and Defendant’s cross motions for summary
judgment. The Magistrate Judge filed a Report and Recommendation (D.E. 22) on August 3,
2020. The Court has reviewed the entire file and record. The Court has made a de novo review
of the issues presented in the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation. The Court notes
that the Plaintiff has not filed objections to the Report and Recommendation nor requested an
extension of time to do so. Being otherwise fully advised in the premises, it is
ADJUDGED that United States Magistrate Judge Jared M. Strauss’s Report and
Recommendation is AFFIRMED and ADOPTED. For the reasons explained in detail in the
Report and Recommendation, the Court finds that there is substantial evidence supporting the
Administrative Law Judge’s determination that the Plaintiff is not disabled. Dr. Coats, who
originally performed the fusion surgery which is allegedly the source of some of Plaintiff’s chronic
pain, noted that nine months after the surgery, Plaintiff could freely ambulate about and could

Case 0:19-cv-62071-FAM Document 23 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/08/2020 Page 2 of 2

return to work without needing medication. Thereafter, Dr. Sands noted that Plaintiff’s back pain
had moderated significantly, Dr. Williamson noted that the majority of her vision returned and that
she could ambulate without an assistive device, Dr. Saddler noted that her general health was good,
and Dr. Whittier noted that she could perform light movements, including lifting and/or carrying
twenty pounds. Accordingly, having adopted the Report and Recommendation, it is
ADJUDGED that Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED, and
Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED.
The Court will enter final judgment by separate order.

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Miami, Florida, this 8th of September 2020.

______________________________________
FEDERICO A. MORENO
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Copies furnished to:
United States Magistrate Judge Jared M. Strauss
Counsel of Record

2