Joyce v. Colvin

Filing 24

Judge Richard G. Stearns: ENDORSED ORDER entered. ORDER ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS Action on motion: ; denying 14 Motion to Remand; granting 18 Motion for Order Affirming Decision of Commissioner; adopting Report and Recommendations re 21 Report and Recommendations. (Attachments: # 1 Report and Recommendations)(Caruso, Stephanie)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
CIVIL ACTION NO. 16-11891-RGS
JEROME P. JOYCE, Plaintiff
v.
NANCY A. BERRYHILL, Acting Commissioner
of the Social Security Administration
ORDER ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE
September 18, 2017
STEARNS, D.J.
I agree with Magistrate Judge Cabell=s thorough analysis of the record
and his conclusion that the Commissioner correctly found that plaintiff was
not disabled as of the date of last insured, as the Social Security Act requires.
Like the Magistrate Judge, I find no reason to fault the assessment by the
Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) of the evidence regarding plaintiff’s
psychological limitations or her determination as to the onset of any
disability (as well as her decision to forego the “empty exercise” of consulting
a medical expert on the issue, see R & R, at 33).

Consequently, the

Recommendation is ADOPTED, plaintiff’s motion to reverse or remand the
decision of the Commissioner is DENIED, and the Commissioner’s motion

to affirm is ALLOWED.1 The Clerk will enter judgment for the Commission
and close the case.
SO ORDERED.
/s/ Richard G. Stearns
________________________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

I have carefully reviewed the Objections filed by plaintiff to the
Report and Recommendation. The objections raise no new facts or
arguments of significance that were not presented to Magistrate Judge Cabell
and considered in his Report (and by the ALJ before him). As he noted, it
is simply not the case that the ALJ did not consider Dr. Golub’s opinion as to
plaintiff’s psychological state. See R & R, at 25-27. She simply did not find
his opinion sufficiently credible to overcome other objective medical
evidence in the record. Nor did she attempt to substitute her untrained
medical judgment for those of the medical reviewers (Dr. Kasdan and Dr.
Fieman), on whose opinions, apart from the record evidence, she
appropriately relied. Id. at 27-28.
1

2