Smith v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 20

ORDER Adopting Magistrate Judge's 17 Report and Recommendation. Signed by District Judge Denise Page Hood. (JOwe)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
MICHELLE SMITH,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No. 14-11804
Honorable Denise Page Hood

COMMISSIONER OF
SOCIAL SECURITY,
Defendant.
/
ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
This matter is before the Court on Magistrate Judge Anthony P. Patti’s
Report and Recommendation on Plaintiff Michelle Smith’s Motion for Summary
Judgment [Docket No. 13, filed October 14, 2014] and Defendant
Commissioner’s Motion for Summary Judgment [Docket No. 14, filed November
13, 2014].

Plaintiff filed an Objection to the Magistrate’s Report and

Recommendation [Docket No. 18, July 1, 2015]. Defendant filed a Response to
the Objection [Docket No. 19, filed July 7, 2015]. For the reasons stated below,
the Court ADOPTS the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation in its
entirety. Defendant Commissioner’s Motion for Summary Judgment [Docket No.
14, filed November 13, 2014] is GRANTED, and Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary
Judgment [Docket No. 13, filed October 14, 2014] is DENIED.

Judicial review of the Commissioner’s decision is limited in scope to
determining whether the Commissioner employed the proper legal criteria in
reaching his conclusion (Garner v. Heckler, 745 F.2d 383 (6th Cir. 1984)). The
credibility findings of an administrative law judge (“ALJ”) must not be discarded
lightly and should be accorded great deference (Hardaway v. Secretary of Health
and Human Services, 823 F.2d 922, 928 (6th Cir. 1987)). A district court’s review
of an ALJ’s decision is not a de novo review. The district court may not resolve
conflicts in the evidence nor decide questions of credibility (Garner, 745 F.2d at
397).

The decision of the Commissioner must be upheld if supported by

substantial evidence, even if the record might support a contrary decision or if the
district court arrives at a different conclusion (Smith v. Secretary of HHS, 893 F.2d
106, 108 (6th Cir. 1984); Mullen v. Bowen, 800 F.2d 535, 545 (6th Cir. 1986)).
The Court has had an opportunity to review this matter and finds that the
Magistrate Judge reached the correct conclusion for the proper reasons. The Court
agrees with the Magistrate Judge that the ALJ’s finding that Plaintiff’s
impairments do not meet or medically equal an impairment listed in 20 C.F.R. Part
404, Subpart P, Appendix 1 is supported by substantial evidence. The Magistrate
Judge reviewed the ALJ’s findings and the record thoroughly in reaching his
conclusion.

The Court also agrees with the Magistrate Judge that the ALJ
2

appropriately articulated Plaintiff’s Residual Functional Capacity, and provided a
sufficiently specific explanation for her credibility determination.

The Court

agrees with the Magistrate Judge’s recommendation that the records Plaintiff
identified in her request for a Sentence Six Remand do not warrant remand for
consideration of new and material evidence.

The Magistrate Judge set forth

specific examples of how the ALJ’s findings were supported by the record.
Plaintiff’s objections are based on the same arguments raised in her summary
judgment motion brief.
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate
Judge Anthony P. Patti [Docket No. 17, filed June 19, 2015] is ACCEPTED and
ADOPTED as this Court’s findings and conclusions of law.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary
Judgment [Docket No. 13, filed October 14, 2014] is DENIED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant Commissioner’s Motion for
Summary Judgment [Docket No. 14, filed November 13, 2014] is GRANTED.

3

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Commissioner’s decision is
AFFIRMED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the case is DISMISSED with prejudice.

s/Denise Page Hood
Denise Page Hood
United States District Judge
Dated: July 31, 2015
I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon counsel of
record on July 31, 2015, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.
s/LaShawn R. Saulsberry
Case Manager

4