Schaney v. Commissioner of Social Security
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS. Signed by Judge George C Smith on 7-13-10. (ga)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION Daniel Philip Schaney, Plaintiff, v. Michael J. Astrue, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant. : ORDER This matter is before the Court on plaintiff Daniel Philip Schaney's April 23, 2010 objections (doc. 23) to Magistrate Judge Abel's April 13, 2010 Report and Recommendation (doc. 21). The Court, having reviewed the record de novo, determines that there is substantial evidence supporting the administrative law judge's determination that plaintiff Schaney is not disabled within the meaning of the Act. The Court further finds for the reasons set out below that plaintiff's objections to the Report and Recommendation are without merit. Plaintiff Schaney maintains that he became disabled in September 2002, at age 32, by alcoholism, anxiety, depression, social disorders, and low back pain. The administrative law judge found that Schaney retained the ability to perform a reduced range of work having light exertional demands. Plaintiff Schaney, who is representing himself, argues that "there are no jobs in my area that I can do that will provide me with gainful income to support my wife and : : : : : Case No. 2:09-cv-00431 Judge Smith Magistrate Judge Abel
three children . . . ." (Doc. 23, at p. 1.)(Emphasis in original.) As the Commissioner argues, under 20 C.F.R. § 404.1560(c)(1), a claimant is not disabled if there are a significant number of jobs"in the national economy" that he can perform. Here a vocational expert, 20 C.F.R. § 404.1560(c)(2), testified that an individual of Mr. Schaney's age, education, and vocational background with the residual functional capacity limitations found by the administrative law judge could perform over three million light, unskilled jobs in the national economy, including jobs as an order caller (2 million jobs nationally), a marker (300,000 jobs), and a ticket seller (900,000 jobs). (R. 34-35.) From a review of the record, the Court determines that here is substantial evidence supporting the administrative law judge's finding that Mr. Schaney can perform a reduced range of jobs having light exertional demands. Given that residual functional capacity, the vocational expert's testimony demonstrates that there are a significant number of job available in the national economy that plaintiff can perform. Consequently, there is substantial evidence supporting the administrative law judge's determination that Mr. Schaney is not disabled because there are a significant number of jobs in the national economy that he can perform. See, Lindsley v. Commissioner of Social Security, 560 F.3d 601, 606 (6th Cir. 2009); Harmon v. Apfel, 168 F.3d 289, 292 (6th Cir. 1999). Upon de novo review in accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1)(B), the Court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation. Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment is DENIED. Defendant's motion for summary judgment is
GRANTED. The decision of the Commissioner is AFFIRMED. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to enter JUDGMENT for defendant. This action is hereby DISMISSED. /s/ George C. Smith GEORGE C. SMITH, JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
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?