Masters v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 23

ENTRY AND ORDER SUSTAINING IN PART AND OVERRULING IN PART OBJECTIONS 20 TO THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS 16 ; ADOPTING IN PART THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS 16 ; VACATING THE COMMISSIONER'S NON-DISABILITY FINDING; REMANDING THE APPLICATION FOR FURTHER CONSIDERATION UNDER 42 U.S.C. § 405(g); AND TERMINATING THIS CASE. Signed by Judge Thomas M. Rose on 3-25-2016. (de)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON
TAMALA MASTERS,

:

Case No. 3:14-cv-337

Plaintiff,

:

Judge Thomas M. Rose
Chief Magistrate Judge Sharon L. Ovington

v.

:

CAROLYN W. COLVIN,
Commissioner of the Social
Security Administration,

:
:

Defendant.
:
______________________________________________________________________________
ENTRY AND ORDER SUSTAINING IN PART AND OVERRULING IN PART
OBJECTIONS (DOC. 20) TO THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS (DOC.
16); ADOPTING IN PART THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS (DOC. 16);
VACATING THE COMMISSIONER’S NON-DISABILITY FINDING;
REMANDING THE APPLICATION FOR FURTHER CONSIDERATION UNDER
42 U.S.C. § 405(g); AND TERMINATING THIS CASE
______________________________________________________________________________
This is an action under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for review of the decision of the Commissioner
of the Social Security Administration (“Commissioner”) denying Plaintiff Tamala Masters’s
application for Disability Insurance Benefits. On January 29, 2016, Chief Magistrate Judge
Sharon L. Ovington entered a Report and Recommendations (Doc. 16), which recommended that
the Court reverse the Commissioner’s non-disability finding and remand the matter to the Social
Security Administration for the payment of benefits. On March 9, 2016, the Commissioner filed
Objections (Doc. 20) to the Report and Recommendations. On March 23, 2016, Plaintiff filed a
Response (Doc. 22) to the Commissioner’s Objections. This matter is therefore ripe for the
Court’s review.
As required by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b), the Court has
made a de novo review of the record in this case. Upon said review, the Court finds that the
Commissioner’s objections to reversal of the Commissioner’s non-disability finding and remand
of this case for an immediate award of benefits are SUSTAINED. The Court agrees with the

Chief Magistrate Judge’s determination that the ALJ erred in its analysis of the opinion of Dr.
Eugene Kim, Plaintiff’s treating physician. However, even if, on remand, the ALJ were to find
that Dr. Kim’s opinion is entitled to controlling or deferential weight, that finding would not
dictate the conclusion that Plaintiff was under a benefits-qualifying disability. Consequently, a
remand for further proceedings is more appropriate than reversal of the Commissioner’s
non-disability finding. In addition, a remand for the payment of benefits would not be proper
because this case does not present a situation “where the proof of disability is overwhelming or
where the proof of disability is strong and evidence to the contrary is lacking.” See Faucher v.
Sec’y of Soc. Sec., 409 Fed. App’x 852, 865 (6th Cir. 2011). The Commissioner’s remaining
objections to the Report and Recommendations are OVERRULED.
The Court ADOPTS the analysis in the Report and Recommendations (Doc. 16), with the
exception of Part V.B. (Remand for Benefits) and the Chief Magistrate Judge’s recommendations
that the Commissioner’s non-disability finding be reversed and the case be remanded for the
payment of benefits. Accordingly, the Court rules as follows:
1.

The Commissioner’s non-disability determination is VACATED and no
finding is made as to whether Plaintiff was under a disability within the
meaning of the Social Security Act;

2.

This matter is REMANDED to the Social Security Administration under
Sentence Four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for further consideration consistent
with the Report and Recommendations (Doc. 16); and

3.

The Clerk is ORDERED to terminate this case on the Court’s docket.

DONE and ORDERED in Dayton, Ohio, this Friday, March 25, 2016.
s/Thomas M. Rose
________________________________
THOMAS M. ROSE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2