Ogg v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 21

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS. Signed by Judge George C. Smith on 9/23/15. (lvw)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
EASTERN DIVISION
STEVEN R. OGG,
Plaintiff,
vs.

Case No.: 2:14-cv-987
JUDGE GEORGE C. SMITH
Magistrate Judge Kemp

COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,
Defendant.

ORDER
On July 16, 2015, the United States Magistrate Judge issued a Report and
Recommendation recommending that Plaintiff’s State of Errors be overruled and that final
judgment be entered in favor of the Defendant, the Commissioner of Social Security. (See
Report and Recommendation, Doc. 19). This matter is now before the Court on Plaintiff Steven
Ogg’s Objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation. (Doc. 20). The Court
will consider the matter de novo. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3).
Plaintiff’s objections consist of reincorporating the arguments he raised in his statement
of errors and he specifically objects to the Magistrate Judge’s conclusion that the Commission
properly evaluated the credibility of Plaintiff’s allegations of disabling symptoms arising from
his severe impairments. (Pl.’s Objs. at 1). He asserts that both the ALJ and the Magistrate Judge
improperly equate the demands of full time, competitive work with routine daily activities,
performed at Plaintiff’s own pace. Plaintiff argues that comparing daily functions to typical
work activities is not proper.

The Court has carefully considered this objection and the Report and Recommendation
also analyzed this argument. The Magistrate Judge found that “despite some ambiguity in the
ALJ’s decision, the ALJ did not make a decision that Plaintiff could do light work based solely
on activities of daily living that may not equate to light work activity on a sustained basis, and
that the ALJ did not err in the way he considered discrepancies between Plaintiff’s activities of
daily living and his testimony concerning disabling symptoms.” (Report and Recommendation
at 12, Doc. 19).
The Magistrate Judge considered a number of other things in ultimately reaching his
conclusion, including Plaintiff’s own testimony that he advertised himself as able to perform
lawn care services. Therefore, both the ALJ and the Magistrate Judge properly justified their
findings and did not err in the consideration of Plaintiff’s daily functions. The Court has
therefore carefully considered Plaintiff’s objections, and for the reasons stated in the Report and
Recommendation, this Court finds that the objections are without merit.
Accordingly, the Report and Recommendation, Document 19, is ADOPTED and
AFFIRMED. Plaintiff’s Objections are hereby OVERRULED. Plaintiff’s Statement of Errors
are hereby OVERRULED, the decision of the Commissioner of Social Security is AFFIRMED
and this case is DISMISSED.
The Clerk shall remove Documents 19 and 20 from the Court’s pending motions list, and
enter final judgment in favor of Defendant, the Commissioner of Social Security.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

/s/ George C. Smith__________________
GEORGE C. SMITH, JUDGE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
2