Figuereo v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 26

OPINION AND ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION. Plaintiff's Objections are OVERRULED. The decision of the Commissioner denying disability benefits in this case is AFFIRMED. This case is hereby terminated. Signed by Judge Sarah D. Morrison on 9/8/2021. (tb)

Case: 2:20-cv-01992-SDM-CMV Doc #: 26 Filed: 09/08/21 Page: 1 of 2 PAGEID #: 812

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
EASTERN DIVISION
YOKASTA FIGUEREO,
Plaintiff,

Case No. 2:20-cv-1992
Judge Sarah D. Morrison
Magistrate Judge Vascura

v.
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,
Defendant.

OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court for consideration of the Objections filed by
the Plaintiff Yokasta Figuereo (ECF No. 25) to the Report and Recommendation of
the Magistrate Judge (ECF No. 24) recommending that the decision of the
Commissioner of the Social Security Commissioner denying benefits be affirmed.
Plaintiff protests that the Magistrate Judge did not specifically address two
aspects of her argument regarding the ALJ’s decision to forgo giving Dr. Cruzado’s
treating source opinion controlling weight—Plaintiff’s type 2 diabetes and gluteal
tendinopathy. (ECF No. 25, PageID 809.) Tasked with determining whether the
ALJ’s decision was supported by substantial evidence, the Magistrate Judge
answered in the affirmative while providing record citations supporting her
determination. Simply because the R&R does not explicitly mention the two
conditions does not mean that Magistrate Judge did not consider them; rather, she
found substantial evidence supporting the ALJ’s decision elsewhere in the record.
1

Case: 2:20-cv-01992-SDM-CMV Doc #: 26 Filed: 09/08/21 Page: 2 of 2 PAGEID #: 813

Plaintiff’s final objection is that the Magistrate Judge “missed the main
thrust of Plaintiff’s argument that the evidence cited by the ALJ did not amount to
substantial evidence within the context of the record . . . .” (ECF No. 25, PageID
810.) The Magistrate Judge missed nothing; instead, she disagreed with that
argument and provided competent and correct analysis in support of her conclusion.
Pursuant to Rule 72(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, after a de
novo and careful determination of the record, the Court concludes that the
decision of the Commissioner “is supported by substantial evidence and was made
pursuant to proper legal standards.” Rogers v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 486 F. 3d 234,
241 (6th Cir. 2007). The issues raised in the Plaintiff’s Objections have been
considered and correctly addressed by the Magistrate Judge. Plaintiff’s Objections
(ECF No. 25) are OVERRULED.
The Court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate
Judge. (ECF No. 24.) The decision of the Commissioner denying disability benefits
in this case is AFFIRMED. The Clerk shall TERMINATE this case from the
Court’s docket and enter judgment accordingly.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
/s/Sarah D. Morrison
SARAH D. MORRISON
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2