Strang v. Social Security, Commissioner of

Filing 20

ORDER denying 13 Motion for Summary Judgment; granting 16 Motion for Summary Judgment; adopting 17 Report and Recommendation. Signed by District Judge Victoria A. Roberts. (CPin)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
RICKY ALLEN STRANG,
Plaintiff,
Case Number: 13-11270
Honorable Victoria A. Roberts

v.
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,
Defendant.
____________________________________/

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION (Doc. 17);
GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (Doc. 16);
AND DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (Doc. 13)
Plaintiff appeals the Commissioner of Social Security’s denial of his application
for disability benefits and supplemental security income. Before the Court are the
parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment. The Court referred those motions to
Magistrate Judge Laurie J. Michelson.
On February 20, 2014, Magistrate Judge Michelson filed a Report and
Recommendation (“R&R”) finding that substantial evidence supports the decision of the
Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”). (Doc. # 17). Magistrate Judge Michelson
recommends that the Court GRANT Defendant’s motion for summary judgment, DENY
Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment, and AFFIRM the decision of the Commissioner
of Social Security.
On March 4, 2014, Plaintiff filed objections to the R&R. (Doc. #18). Plaintiff says
the Magistrate errors in finding that: (1) the ALJ did not violate her duty to complete the
record; (2) substantial evidence supports the ALJ’s determination of his residual
functional capacity; (3) the ALJ was not required to give Dr. Wagner’s statements any

weight; (4) the ALJ did not err in her treatment of the physical therapy evidence; and (5)
that the ALJ did not improperly discount his credibility due to lack of funds. Defendant
responded to the objections. (Doc. # 19).
When properly objected to, the Court reviews de novo a Magistrate Judge’s
Report and Recommendation on a dispositive motion. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Plaintiff
filed timely objections that were proper.
After de novo review of the motions for summary judgment, the R&R, Plaintiff’s
objections, and the remainder of the administrative record, the Court agrees with
Magistrate Judge Michelson’s findings. Magistrate Michelson accurately laid out the
facts and relevant parts of the record; she considered the record as a whole, applied
proper standards in reviewing the ALJ’s decision, and followed the applicable case law
and statutory provisions. Magistrate Judge Michelson engaged in a thorough analysis
of the issues and gave well-reasoned explanations for her findings; the ALJ’s decision is
supported by substantial evidence.
The Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Michelson’s Report and Recommendation.
Defendant’s motion for summary judgment is GRANTED; Plaintiff’s motion for summary
judgment is DENIED. The Commissioner’s decision is AFFIRMED.
IT IS ORDERED.

s/Victoria A. Roberts
Victoria A. Roberts
United States District Judge
Dated: March 24, 2014

2

The undersigned certifies that a copy of this
document was served on the attorneys of
record by electronic means or U.S. Mail on
March 24, 2014.
s/Carol A. Pinegar
Deputy Clerk

3