James v. Astrue

Filing 25

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 22 Affirming the Commissioner's decision. The complaint is dismissed. Signed by Chief Judge William T. Moore on 8/14/09. (wwp)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEoRGIAOO9 AUG 14 AM U: 12 WAYCROSS DIVISION ................................... A.

PAMELA JAMES, Plaintiff,
V.

CIVIL ACTION NO.: CV508-017

MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant.

ORDER After an independent review of the record, the undersigned concurs with the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, to which Objections have been filed. In her Objections, Plaintiff contends that the Administrative Law Judge ("AU") and the Magistrate Judge erred by finding that her carpet tunnel syndrome was a severe impairment, but did not cause any functional limitations. (Doc. No. 24, p. 1-2). Plaintiff asserts that every medical provider she saw from 2006 forward documented severe recurrent right carpal tunnel syndrome and moderate left carpal tunnel syndrome. (Id. 2-3). Plaintiff further asserts that in order for the ALJ and Magistrate Judge to reach their conclusions, they would have to ignore the medical findings of Dr. Lex Kenerly, Dr. Manuel Cuesta, Dr. Daniel Suh, and her physical therapist, as well as ignore that she had a second right carpal tunnel surgery. (Id. 3-5). Plaintiff contends that her subjective complaints of pain were not properly credited. Plaintiff further contends that

AO 72A (Rev. 8/82)

the ALJ failed to consider her persistent efforts to obtain pain relief pursuant to Social Security Ruling 96-7p. (Id. at 5-6). Plaintiff's Objections are for the most part merely reassertions of the contentions found in her original brief. As the Magistrate Judge noted in his Report, there is substantial evidence supporting the AL's finding that Plaintiff's severe impairments do not cause limitations that prevent her from working at the light exertional level. Plaintiff's assertion that the ALJ erred by failing to consider that her persistent efforts to obtain pain relief enhanced her credibility is without merit. Social Security Ruling 96-7p does not require the ALJ to discuss Plaintiff's longitudinal efforts to seek pain relief. Social Security Ruling 96-7p merely requires the AL's decision to contain specific reasons for his credibility finding, which the ALJ has done here. The Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation is adopted as the opinion of the Court. The decision of the Commissioner is AFFIRMED. Plaintiff's Complaint is DISMISSED. The Clerk of the Court is authorized and directed to enter the appropriate judgment of dismissal. SO ORDERED, this /$day of ,2009.

WILLIAM T. MOORE, JR., C EF JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OPI GEORGIA

AO 72A (Rev. 8/82)

2