Standing v. Colvin

Filing 17

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION for 15 Report and Recommendation. Decision of the Commissioner to deny plaintiff's applications for disability insurance and supplemental security income benefits is affirmed. Signed by Honorable Tim Leonard on 04/29/14. (jy)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA

JEANETTE GRACE STANDING,
Plaintiff,
v.

CAROLYN W. COLVIN,
Acting Commissioner of Social
Security Administration,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. CIV-13-336-L

ORDER
On January 24, 2014, Magistrate Judge Gary M. Purcell entered a Report
and Recommendation in this action brought by plaintiff pursuant to 42 U.S.C.
§405(g) for judicial review of the defendant Commissioner of the Social Security
Administration’s (Commissioner’s) final decision denying plaintiff’s applications for
disability insurance and supplemental security income benefits under Titles II and
XVI of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 416(I), 423, 1382. The Magistrate
Judge recommended that the decision of the defendant Commissioner be
affirmed.
The court file reflects that plaintiff filed a timely Objection to the Magistrate
Judge’s Report and Recommendation which the court has carefully considered.

Upon de novo review, however, the court finds that the the Report and
Recommendation should be and is hereby adopted in its entirety.
The Magistrate Judge properly found that there is substantial evidence to
support the ALJ’s step five finding other jobs are available in the economy that
plaintiff can perform. The Magistrate Judge was correct in concluding that, in the
absence of any specific job description in the DOT that the worker in the position
of punch press operator is required to climb ladders, ropes, or scaffolds, this job
is consistent with the ALJ's RFC restrictions of occasional climbing of stairs or
ramps. The court rejects plaintiff’s argument that this was an illogical
interpretation of the job description as written. The court also concludes that the
Magistrate Judge correctly found that the job of food service worker, identified by
the VE, was consistent with the RFC restriction of no contact with the general
public.
The court does not agree with plaintiff's contention that the Magistrate
Judge improperly engaged in post hoc rationalization of the ALJ’s failure to
mention plaintiff's Red Rock treatment record; rather, the Magistrate was correct
in reasoning that the treatment record was not significantly probative evidence
and thus its omission by the ALJ does not constitute reversible error. The court
also concurs with the conclusion of the Magistrate Judge that the ALJ’s findings
provide a sufficient basis for the ALJ's reasons for assigning little weight to the
opinions of Dr. Hill.
2

Thus, upon de novo review, the court finds that the Report and
Recommendation should be and is hereby adopted in its entirety. Accordingly,
the decision of the Commissioner to deny plaintiff’s applications for disability
insurance and supplemental security income benefits is AFFIRMED.
It is so ordered this 29th day of April, 2014.

3