Malhas v. Commissioner of Social Security
Filing
23
ORDER ADOPTING 20 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION. Signed by Honorable Robin J. Cauthron on 9/25/17. (lg)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
SAM HAMDI MALHAS,
Plaintiff,
vs.
NANCY A. BERRYHILL,
Acting Commissioner of the Social
Security Administration,
Defendant.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case Number CIV-16-1440-C
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
On August 14, 2017, United States Magistrate Judge Suzanne Mitchell issued her
Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) in this action in which Plaintiff seeks review of the
denial of his application for disability insurance benefits. Judge Mitchell recommended
the Commissioner’s decision be reversed. Defendant’s objection to the R&R was timely
filed, and the Court reviews the matter de novo.
Defendant’s objection to the R&R argues that Judge Mitchell impermissibly
reweighed the evidence.
In recommending reversal, Judge Mitchell noted that the
Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) focused on certain portions of Plaintiff’s medical
records and from that portion of the records improperly made speculative inferences. The
ALJ then rejected the findings of the treating physician based on the ALJ’s opinion about
Plaintiff’s abilities arising from the ALJ’s “cherry picking” certain portions from the
medical records. As Judge Mitchell correctly noted, this action by the ALJ was error.
See McGoffin v. Barnhart, 288 F.3d 1248, 1252 (10th Cir. 2002). Defendant’s arguments
fail to demonstrate any error by Judge Mitchell.
Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 20)
issued by the Magistrate Judge, in its entirety, REVERSES the decision of the ALJ, and
REMANDS this matter to the Commissioner for further proceedings. A judgment shall
issue accordingly.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 25th day of September, 2017.
2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?