O'Neal v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 25

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 23 Report and Recommendation in its entirety. The decision of the Commissioner is AFFIRMED and this matter is closed from the Court's docket. Signed by Judge S Arthur Spiegel on 4/9/2013. (km1)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION
BOBBY O’NEAL,

:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:

Plaintiff,

v.

COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL
SECURITY

NO. 1:12-CV-00246

ORDER

Defendant.
This
Judge’s

matter

Report

and

is

before

Recommendation

objections thereto (doc. 24).
the

Magistrate

Court

(doc.

on

23)

the
and

Magistrate
Plaintiff’s

In her Report and Recommendation,

Judge

recommends

Law

Administrative

the

Judge

that

the

(“ALJ”)

decision

denying

of

the

Plaintiff’s

applications for disability insurance benefits and supplemental
security income be affirmed and this case be dismissed from the
Court’s docket.
In

brief,

Plaintiff

filed

applications

for

supplemental security income and disability insurance benefits,
alleging an amended disability onset of October 15, 2010, due to
back and foot problems and amputation of several fingers on his
right hand.
that

The Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) determined

Plaintiff

suffered

from

1

degenerative

disc

disease,

amputation of the middle three fingers of the right hand, and
left heel protuberance.

However, the ALJ further determined

that Plaintiff was not disabled under the Social Security Act
and that he had the residual functional capacity to perform
light work, with certain restrictions.
Plaintiff

argued

that

the

ALJ

erred

in

finding

Plaintiff capable of performing his past relevant work as a
stock checker and industrial cleaner because the work that the
ALJ relied on as “past relevant work” was not technically “past
relevant work.” The Magistrate Judge rejected this assignment of
error, determining that the ALJ’s decisions were supported by
substantial evidence.
As required by 29 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Federal Rule of
Civil Procedure 72(b), the Court has reviewed the comprehensive
findings of the Magistrate Judge and considered de novo all of
the filings in this matter.

Upon thorough consideration of the

foregoing, the Court finds Plaintiff’s objections unpersuasive
and

determines

Recommendation

that
is

the

Magistrate

thorough,

Judge’s

well-reasoned

Report
and

and

correct.

Consequently, the Court ADOPTS and AFFIRMS it in its entirety
(doc. 23).

Accordingly, the decision of the Commissioner is

2

AFFIRMED and this matter is closed from the Court’s docket.
SO ORDERED.

Dated:

April 9, 2013

s/S. Arthur Spiegel________________
S. Arthur Spiegel
United States Senior District Judge

3