Smith v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 20

Order: The Magistrate Judge's R&R (Doc. 18 ) be, and the same hereby is, adopted as the order of this Court. The Commissioner's decision denying the plaintiff's application for benefits be, and the same hereby is, affirmed.Judge James G. Carr on 5/15/17. (Attachments: # 1 R&R)(C,D)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION Michelle Renee Smith, Case No. 3:16CV1073 Plaintiff v. ORDER Nancy A. Berryhill, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant This is a Social Security case in which the plaintiff, Michelle Smith, appeals from the Commissioner’s decision denying her application for benefits. An administrative law judge found that Smith, though suffering from multiple severe impairments, was not disabled because: 1) she had the residual functional capacity to perform work involving lifting, pushing, and pulling up to twenty pounds and that would require no more than six hours of standing, walking, or sitting; and 2) a significant number of jobs matching those limitations existed in the national economy. (Doc. 10 at 153–58, 159). Pending is Magistrate Judge Limbert’s Report and Recommendation, which recommends that I affirm the Commissioner’s decision. (Doc. 18). In particular, the Magistrate Judge found that substantial evidence supported the ALJ’s decision to afford significant weight to the opinions of two state-agency psychological consultants, but to reject their opinions that Smith “required a calm, consistent setting with . . . no fast-paced production demands.” (Id. at 12–14). Smith has filed a notice that she has no objections to the R&R. (Doc. 19). Because the failure to object to an R&R amounts to a waiver of Smith’s right to de novo review, Amison v. Legg, 2015 WL 853526, *1 (N.D. Ohio) (Lioi, J.), and because in any event I find the R&R to be well-taken, it is hereby ORDERED THAT: 1. The Magistrate Judge’s R&R (Doc. 18) be, and the same hereby is, adopted as the order of this Court; and 2. The Commissioner’s decision denying the plaintiff’s application for benefits be, and the same hereby is, affirmed. So ordered. /s/ James G. Carr Sr. U.S. 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?