Stockdale v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 17

Memorandum of Opinion and Order Adopting 16 the Report and Recommendation. The decision of the Commissioner of Social Security is affirmed. Judgment will be entered in favor of Defendant (other related doc 1 ). Judge Benita Y. Pearson on 7/14/2017 (C,KA) Modified text 7/14/2017 (C,KA).

PEARSON, J.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
EASTERN DIVISION
CYNTHIA A STOCKDALE,
Plaintiff,
v.
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL
SECURITY,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CASE NO. 1:16CV2304

JUDGE BENITA Y. PEARSON

MEMORANDUM OF OPINION
AND ORDER

An Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) denied Plaintiff Cynthia A. Stockdale’s
application for Disability Insurance Benefits (“DIB”) after a hearing in the above-captioned case.
That decision became the final determination of the Commissioner of Social Security when the
Appeals Council denied the request to review the ALJ’s decision. The claimant sought judicial
review of the Commissioner’s decision, and the Court referred the case to Magistrate Judge
Thomas M. Parker for preparation of a report and recommendation pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636
and Local Rule 72.2(b)(1).
The magistrate judge submitted a Report (ECF No. 16) recommending that the decision
of the Commissioner be affirmed. Specifically, the magistrate judge recommends that the Court
find: (1) the ALJ’s Step Three finding is supported by substantial evidence, including medical
opinion evidence (ECF No. 16 at PageID #: 640-44); (2) the ALJ’s evaluation of Plaintiff’s
obesity and determination that Plaintiff did not meet, or medically equal, the criteria for this
listed impairment is supported by substantial evidence (ECF No. 16 at PageID #: 644-47); and

(1:16CV2304)
(3) the ALJ’s residual functioning capacity (“RFC”) finding was properly determined and is
supported by substantial evidence (ECF No. 16 at PageID #: 648-50).
Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2) provides that objections to a Report and Recommendation must
be filed within 14 days after service. Objections to the magistrate judge’s Report and
Recommendation were, therefore, due on July 3, 2017. Neither party has filed objections,
evidencing satisfaction with the magistrate judge’s recommendations. Any further review by
this Court would be a duplicative and inefficient use of the Court’s limited resources. Thomas v.
Arn, 728 F.2d 813 (6th Cir. 1984), aff’d, 474 U.S. 140 (1985); Howard v. Secretary of Health
and Human Services, 932 F.2d 505 (6th Cir. 1991); United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947, 94950 (6th Cir. 1981).
Accordingly, the Report and Recommendation of the magistrate judge is hereby adopted.
The decision of the Commissioner of Social Security is affirmed. Judgment will be entered in
favor of Defendant.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

July 14, 2017
Date

/s/ Benita Y. Pearson
Benita Y. Pearson
United States District Judge