Johnson v. Social Security Administration
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS 13 . The report and recommendations is adopted, as set forth in document. FURTHER ORDERED that this action is dismissed with prejudice. Signed by Judge Greg Gerard Guidry on 09/11/2020.(ko)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
SYLVESTER C JOHNSON
ANDREW SAUL, ACTING
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL
Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) of the Social Security Act (the “Act”), Sylvester C. Johnson
(“Plaintiff”) seeks judicial review of the final decision of the Commissioner of the Social Security
Administration (the “Commissioner”), denying Plaintiff’s claim for a period of disability and
disability insurance benefits (“DIB”) under Title II of the Act. 42 U.S.C. § 1382(c).
Plaintiff seeks a reversal of the Commissioner’s decision finding that Plaintiff was not
disabled and an award of disability benefits from May 15, 2015 into the indefinite future.1 Plaintiff
contends that this matter should be remanded for consideration of new and material evidence of
Plaintiff’s stroke that was submitted to the Appeals Council but never available to the
Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”).2 Plaintiff further claims the ALJ erred in failing to provide a
rationale for not awarding a closed period of disability and erred in not awarding a closed period
On September 19, 2016, Plaintiff filed a Title II application for a period of disability and
DIB, alleging a disability onset date of May 5, 2015. Plaintiff’s claim was denied at the agency
level, and Plaintiff received a hearing before an ALJ on June 27, 2018. On October 16, 2018, the
ALJ issued a decision finding that Plaintiff was not disabled. On April 28, 2019, the Appeals
R. Doc. 1.
R. Doc. 9.
R. Doc. 9.
Council declined to review the ALJ’s decision, and the ALJ’s decision became the
Commissioner’s final decision. On June 27, 2019, Plaintiff filed his complaint in the Court.
On March 3, 2020, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation,
recommending that Plaintiff’s appeal be denied and his complaint be DISMISSED WITH
PREJUDICE.4 The Magistrate Judge determined that the Appeals Council did not err in denying
review despite the new medical records Plaintiff submitted dated after the ALJ’s decision and that
the ALJ used the appropriate legal standards to weigh and resolve conflicts in the evidence.
Plaintiff filed objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation, 5 and the
Commissioner responded to Plaintiff’s objections.6
Having carefully considered the administrative record, the applicable law, the Magistrate
Judge’s Report and Recommendation, the Plaintiff’s Objections to Magistrate’s Report and
Recommendation, and the Commissioner’s Response to Plaintiff’s Objections to the Report, the
Court OVERRULES Plaintiff’s objections, APPROVES the Magistrate Judge’s Report and
Recommendation and ADOPTS the Report as the Court’s opinion herein.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s objections to the Magistrate
Judge’s Report and Recommendation are OVERRULED, and that the Report and
Recommendation is ADOPTED as the Court’s opinion. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this
action is DISMISSED with prejudice.
New Orleans, Louisiana, on this 11th day of September, 2020.
GREG GERARD GUIDRY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
R. Doc. 13.
R. Doc. 14.
R. Doc. 15.
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?