Shockley v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration
Filing
17
Memorandum Opinion and Order For the reasons set forth herein, the Court adopts the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 16). The decision of the Commissioner of Social Security is affirmed. Judgment will be entered in favor of the Defendant. Judge Benita Y. Pearson on 12/19/2018. (S,Ke)
PEARSON, J.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
EASTERN DIVISION
YVONNE SCHOCKLEY,
Plaintiff,
v.
NANCY A. BERRYHILL,
ACTING COMMISSIONER OF
SOCIAL SECURITY,
Defendant.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
CASE NO. 1:17CV2621
JUDGE BENITA Y. PEARSON
MEMORANDUM OF OPINION
AND ORDER
An Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) denied Plaintiff Yvonne Schockley’s applications
for disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income, after a hearing on March 3,
2015. The Appeals Council remanded Schockley’s case for the ALJ to consider newly submitted
evidence. The ALJ held a second hearing on August 2, 2016, and again denied Plaintiff’s
applications. The Appeals Council denied Plaintiff’s request to review the ALJ’s decision,
thereby rendering the ALJ’s decision the final decision of the Commissioner.
On December 18, 2017, Plaintiff filed a Complaint (ECF No. 1), seeking judicial review
of the Commissioner’s decision. 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). On December 3, 2018, the magistrate judge submitted a Report &
Recommendation (ECF No. 16) recommending that the Court affirm the Commissioner’s
decision as supported by substantial evidence and made pursuant to proper legal standards.
(1:17CV2621)
Specifically, the magistrate judge found that the ALJ applied proper legal procedures in
weighing personal, educational, and vocational evidence, relevant medical evidence (of
Plaintiff’s physical and mental health), relevant opinion evidence, a relevant third-party
statement, and relevant testimonial evidence. ECF No. 16 at PageID#: 1804-22. The magistrate
judge also found that the ALJ reached a decision supported by substantial evidence in evaluating
Plaintiff’s subjective symptom complaints. Id. at PageID#: 1826-31.
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 were, therefore,
due on December 17, 2018. 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, 949-50 (6th Cir. 1981).
Accordingly, the Report & Recommendation of the magistrate judge (ECF No. 16) 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.
December 19, 2018
Date
/s/ Benita Y. Pearson
Benita Y. Pearson
United States District Judge
2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?