Winick v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 31

ORDER ADOPTING 13 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION;mailed to Jason Winick, 2309 SW 135th St., Oklahoma City, OK 73170. Signed by Honorable Robin J. Cauthron on 1/26/16. (lg)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
JASON WINICK,
Plaintiff,
vs.
CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting
Commissioner of Social Security
Administration,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. CIV-14-116-C

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
This action for judicial review of the Commissioner’s denial of disability insurance
benefits was referred for initial proceedings to United States Magistrate Judge Charles B.
Goodwin, consistent with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B). Judge Goodwin entered a Report and
Recommendation (“R&R”) on July 28, 2015, recommending that the decision of the
Commissioner be affirmed. Plaintiff, through counsel and pro se timely, filed an objection
to this R&R, and the Court therefore considers the matter de novo.
In his thorough and well-reasoned Report and Recommendation, Judge Goodwin sets
out the relevant facts and prevailing law, and no purpose would be served in repeating those
here. In objection, Plaintiff, with one exception, merely restates earlier arguments which are,
for the reasons stated by Judge Goodwin, without merit.
The sole exception is Plaintiff’s argument that the ALJ failed to properly consider the
evidence that he has been awarded benefits from the United States Department of Veteran’s
Affairs (“VA”) based on disability. In his pro se objection, Plaintiff argues the ALJ failed

to properly account for this fact in determining Plaintiff’s residual functional capacity. After
review of the record, the Court finds the ALJ adequately addressed this issue. The ALJ
clearly stated he was aware of the VA’s determination and factored it into his decision. The
Court rejects Plaintiff’s argument that more was required.
Accordingly, the Court adopts, in its entirety, the Report and Recommendation of the
Magistrate Judge (Dkt. No. 13), and for the reasons stated therein, the decision of the
Commissioner is affirmed. A judgment will enter accordingly.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 26th day of January, 2016.

2