COOKE v. BERRYHILL

Filing 20

ORDER signed by CHIEF JUDGE THOMAS D. SCHROEDER on 9/28/2018 adopting the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation 17 ; that the Commissioner's decision finding no disability is AFFIRMED, that Plaintiff's Mot ion for Judgment on the Pleadings (Doc. 10 ) is DENIED, that Defendant's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings (Doc. 14 ) is GRANTED, and that this action is DISMISSED with prejudice. A Judgment dismissing this action will be entered contemporaneously with this Order. (Sheets, Jamie)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
TIMOTHY COOKE,
Plaintiff,
v.
NANCY A. BERRYHILL,
Acting Commissioner of
Social Security,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

1:17CV841

ORDER
The Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge was
filed with the court in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and, on
August 21, 2018, was served on the parties in this action.
17, 18.)

Plaintiff objected to the Recommendation.

(Docs.

(Doc. 19.)

The court has appropriately reviewed the portions of the
Magistrate Judge’s report to which objection was made and has made
a de novo determination in accord with the Magistrate Judge’s
report.

The

court

therefore

adopts

the

Magistrate

Judge’s

Recommendation.1

1

Plaintiff objects to the conclusion that he waived any objection to
the ALJ’s failure to conduct further IQ testing. Plaintiff’s objections
provide a selective recitation of the facts, which are more accurately
set out in the Recommendation.
In particular, the Recommendation
indicates how Plaintiff made a strategic decision to pursue other grounds
for relief and properly finds there were several occasions where
Plaintiff abandoned or waived any claim for further IQ testing.
For
example, the ALJ stated his intention to rule on the record as presented,
with no further IQ testing, Plaintiff declined to seek to obtain any
other exhibits at a new hearing when asked by the ALJ, and even the

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Commissioner’s decision
finding no disability is AFFIRMED, that Plaintiff’s Motion for
Judgment on the Pleadings (Doc. 10) is DENIED, that Defendant’s
Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings (Doc. 14) is GRANTED, and
that this action is DISMISSED with prejudice.
A

Judgment

dismissing

this

action

will

be

entered

contemporaneously with this Order.
/s/
Thomas D. Schroeder
United States District Judge
September 28, 2018

Plaintiff himself declined to offer any argument about his IQ when given
the chance to do so. (Doc. 17 at 12-14.)
2