Chesbro v. Social Security Administration

Filing 16

ORDER by Judge Frank H. Seay: sustaining and adopting (Dkt No 13 ) Report and Recommendation which affirms the decision of the ALJ (neh, Deputy Clerk)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
EASTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
KATHRYN LEE CHESBRO,

)
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v.
) No. CIV-14-441-FHS-KEW
)
1
CAROLYN W, COLVIN ,
)
Acting Commissioner Social
)
Security Administration,
)
)
Defendant. )

ORDER
On March 15, 2016, the United States Magistrate Judge for this
District filed a Report and Recommendation in this case. An objection
was filed by Plaintiff on March 28, 2016. In this objection, Plaintiff
objected to certain findings of facts and omissions, findings based
on unpublished opinions concerning the persuasive effect of
Plaintiff’s GAF and the Report and Recommendation’s conclusions and
reasoning finding that the Plaintiff’s mental impairments do not meet
or equal the Listing 12.04 found at pages 6 and 7 of the Report and
Recommendation.
objection.

On April 8, 2016, Defendant filed a response to this

In the response, Defendant argued that the ALJ’s decision

was supported by substantial evidence and legally correct.
1

As a

The Court has been informed by Defendant that on February 14, 2013,
Carolyn W. Colvin became the Acting Commissioner of Social Security.
Pursuant to Rule 25 (d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure,
Carolyn W. Colvin is automatically substituted for Michael J. Astrue
as the defendant in this action. Thus, this suit will proceed with
this substitution in effect. See 42 U.S.C. Sec. 405 (g) (“Any action
instituted in accordance with this subsection shall survive
notwithstanding any change in the person occupying the office of
Commissioner of Social Security or any vacancy in such office.”)

result, this Court should adopt the findings in the Report and
Recommendation which suggests this court should affirm the decision
of the Commissioner.

The court has reviewed the objection and overrules it.

First,

Plaintiff fails to establish how the omission of certain findings of
facts was an error or how this error caused her harm. Second, the
Plaintiff objects to the “findings reasoning concerning persuasive
use of her GAF based on unpublished opinions”.

However, Plaintiff

admits unpublished opinions can be used for their persuasiveness.
Thus, the court finds no merit to this argument.

Finally, Plaintiff

objects to the recommendation that the Court find her mental
impairments did not meet or equal the requirements of section 12.04
of the Listings.

However, the court finds the evidence did not

support a finding that any of her impairments met the requirements
of any section of the Listing.

The Report and Recommendation found the decision by the defendant
should be AFFIRMED.

This Court finds the Report and Recommendation

of the Magistrate Judge applied the proper standards and documents
numerous references to the record which support the recommendation
of the Magistrate Judge that the Commissioner's decision be SUSTAINED.

Upon consideration of the entire record and the issues herein,
this Court finds and orders that the Report and Recommendation of the
United States Magistrate Judge be SUSTAINED and adopted by this Court
as this Court's Findings and Order.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 12th day of April, 2016.