Cook v. Social Security, Commissioner of

Filing 36

ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S Report and Recommendation 33 - Denying 24 Motion for Summary Judgment filed by David M Cook; Granting 30 Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Commissioner of Social Security. Signed by District Judge Gerald E Rosen. (RBri)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION DAVID M. COOK, Plaintiff, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant. _______________________________/ ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION At a session of said Court, held in the U.S. Courthouse, Detroit, Michigan on August 31, 2009 PRESENT: Honorable Gerald E. Rosen Chief Judge, United States District Court
On July 6, 2009, Magistrate Judge Steven D. Pepe issued a Report and Recommendation ("R & R") recommending that the Court grant the Defendant Commissioner of Social Security's motion for summary judgment and deny Plaintiff David M. Cook's motion for summary judgment. On July 17, 2009, Plaintiff filed a document captioned "Motion to Appeal Judgment," which the Court will treat as objections to the R & R.1 The Court has now reviewed the R & R, Plaintiff's objections, the parties' underlying motions, and the record as a whole. For the reasons set forth
The Defendant Commissioner likewise has treated this submission as objections, and has filed a July 31, 2009 response to these objections.
1

Case No. 08-13404 Hon. Gerald E. Rosen Magistrate Judge Steven D. Pepe

briefly below, the Court finds no merit in Plaintiff's objections, and therefore adopts the Magistrate Judge's thorough and well-reasoned R & R as the opinion of this Court. Plaintiff's principal objection is that he was not given a sufficient opportunity to gather and present evidence in support of his claim for disability benefits. Yet, as the Magistrate Judge explained in a March 24, 2009 order denying Plaintiff's various motions for subpoenas and search warrants, the scope of this Court's review of the Defendant Commissioner's decision is limited, and additional evidence that was not before the Administrative Law Judge ("ALJ") may be considered only for the purpose of determining whether a case should be remanded for further administrative proceedings to address this additional evidence. This Court simply is not permitted to engage in de novo substantive review of newly-produced evidence purportedly bearing upon a claim for disability benefits, nor is there any basis for permitting wide-ranging discovery in an effort to obtain such evidence. As stated in the March 24 order, Plaintiff has failed to identify a basis for permitting such additional evidence gathering in this case, even for the limited, permissible purpose of determining whether a remand is warranted. Moreover, it bears emphasis that the Magistrate Judge did address the additional evidence that Plaintiff attached as exhibits to his summary judgment motion, explaining in the R & R that these additional materials did not warrant a remand for further administrative proceedings. (See R & R at 22-24.) The Court fully concurs in the Magistrate Judge's disposition of this matter. Plaintiff next asserts that he is entitled to a trial, to present expert testimony, and to
2

an award of benefits. Again, the only issue properly before this Court is whether the ALJ's decision is supported by substantial evidence in the administrative record. For the reasons stated by the Magistrate Judge in his thorough and comprehensive R & R, the Court finds that the ALJ's decision meets this standard. Accordingly, NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge's July 6, 2009 Report and Recommendation is ADOPTED as the opinion of this Court. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, for the reasons stated in the R & R, Defendant's motion for summary judgment (docket #30) is GRANTED, and Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment (docket #24) is DENIED.

s/Gerald E. Rosen Chief Judge, United States District Court Dated: August 31, 2009 I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon counsel of record on September 1, 2009, by electronic and/or ordinary mail. s/Ruth Brissaud Case Manager

3