Potter v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner of (TV2)

Filing 19

ORDER: That the Court ACCEPTS IN WHOLE the R&R [Doc. 18]. PlaintiffsMotion for Summary Judgment 14 is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part, and defendants Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. 16] is GRANTED in part andDENIED in part. This case is hereby REMANDED to the Commissioner for furtherproceedings consistent with the R&R. Signed by Chief District Judge Thomas A Varlan on 7/17/15. (ABF)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
AT KNOXVILLE
TIFFANY N. POTTER,
Plaintiff,
v.
CAROLYN W. COLVIN,
Commissioner of Social Security,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No.: 3:14-CV-333-TAV-HBG

ORDER
This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation (the “R&R”)
entered by United States Magistrate Judge H. Bruce Guyton on June 23, 2015 [Doc. 18].
In the R&R, Magistrate Judge Guyton recommended that plaintiff’s Motion for Summary
Judgment [Doc. 14] be granted in part and denied in part and that defendant’s Motion for
Summary Judgment [Doc. 16] be denied in part. Further, Magistrate Judge Guyton
recommended that this case be remanded to the Commissioner for further proceedings
consistent with the R&R. There have been no timely objections to the R&R, and enough
time has passed since the filing of the R&R to treat any objections as having been
waived. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b).
After a careful review of the matter, the Court is in agreement with Magistrate
Judge Guyton’s recommendations, which the Court adopts and incorporates into its
ruling. Accordingly, the Court ACCEPTS IN WHOLE the R&R [Doc. 18]. Plaintiff’s
Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. 14] is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part,

and defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. 16] is GRANTED in part and
DENIED in part. This case is hereby REMANDED to the Commissioner for further
proceedings consistent with the R&R. On remand:
• The ALJ shall reassess plaintiff’s RFC based on a consideration of the
medical evidence as a whole, specifically considering the entirety of Dr.
Kanagasegar’s treatment records and the opinions of plaintiff’s non-treating
and non-examining physicians;
• In reassessing plaintiff’s RFC, the ALJ shall consider the transcript as a
whole, including the medical records of Dr. Choo and University
Rheumatology Associates; and
• Once the ALJ has reassessed plaintiff’s RFC based on a consideration of
the record as a whole, he shall reconsider all subsequent and pertinent steps
of the disability analysis based on plaintiff’s reassessed RFC.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/ Thomas A. Varlan
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

ENTERED AS A JUDGMENT
s/ Debra C. Poplin
CLERK OF COURT

2