Ethridge v. Astrue

Filing 27

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's objections to the United States Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation are OVERRULED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation of the Unit ed States Magistrate Judge is SUSTAINED, ADOPTED, and INCORPORATED herein. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the decision of the Commissioner denying Plaintiff's application for disability insurance benefits under Title II of the Social Security Act is AFFIRMED. A separate Judgment shall accompany this Memorandum and Order. Signed by District Judge Audrey G. Fleissig on 3/14/2013. (NCL)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION

STANLEY ETHRIDGE,
Plaintiff,
vs.
MICHAEL J. ASTRUE,
Commissioner of Social Security,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 4:11CV02100 AGF (TIA)

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Magistrate Judge Terry I. Adelman’s Report
and Recommendation that the Commissioner’s decision denying Plaintiff’s application
for disability insurance benefits under Title II of the Social Security Act be affirmed.
Plaintiff has filed Objections to the Report and Recommendation.
When a party objects to a Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation, the
Court must “make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified
proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made.”
28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). In his objections, Plaintiff argues that the Administrative Law
Judge did not properly take into account Plaintiff’s mental impairments in assessing
Plaintiff’s residual functional capacity. Plaintiff points to various medical opinions in the
record as well as to evidence of his Global Assessment of Functioning (“GAF”) scores.

Upon de novo review of the record, including the administrative transcript, the
Court believes that a close question is presented with respect to the ALJ’s evaluation of
Plaintiff’s mental impairments. The medical record contains conflicting evidence on the
matter. In such a case, it is the ALJ’s domain and not the Court’s to resolve such
conflicts.
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s objections to the United States
Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation are OVERRULED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation of the
United States Magistrate Judge is SUSTAINED, ADOPTED, and INCORPORATED
herein.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the decision of the Commissioner denying
Plaintiff’s application for disability insurance benefits under Title II of the Social
Security Act is AFFIRMED.
A separate Judgment shall accompany this Memorandum and Order.

_______________________________
AUDREY G. FLEISSIG
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated this 14th day of March, 2013.