Johnson v. Social Security Administration

Filing 22

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS; denying 16 Motion for Judgment on the Record; adopting Report and Recommendations re 19 Report and Recommendation. For the foregoing reasons, the Report and Recommendation (Doc. No. 19) is ADOPTED, a nd the final decision of the Commissioner is AFFIRMED. Plaintiff's Motion for Judgment on the Record (Doc. No. 16) is DENIED. The Clerk shall enter judgment in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 58. Signed by Chief Judge Waverly D. Crenshaw, Jr on 5/10/2018. (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(am)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
COOKEVILLE DIVISION
CINDY D. JOHNSON,
Plaintiff,
v.
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL
SECURITY,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. 2:17-cv-00022
CHIEF JUDGE CRENSHAW

ORDER
Before the Court is a Report and Recommendation from the Magistrate Judge,
recommending the Court affirm the final decision of the Commissioner. (Doc. No. 19.) Plaintiff
filed timely objections (Doc. No. 20), to which the Commissioner responded (Doc. No. 21). The
Court has conducted a de novo review of the record, and for the following reasons, the Report and
Recommendation is ADOPTED.
Plaintiff’s only objection is that the Administrative Law Judge failed to give the opinion
of her treating physician, Michael Cummings, M.D., controlling weight. (Doc. No. 20.) Dr.
Cummings submitted a Medical Source Statement on March 27, 2014, which assessed Plaintiff
with “extreme exertional and manipulative limitations” and “some vague, unspecified, postural
and environmental limitations.” (Doc. No. 12 at 385.) Dr. Cummings opined that Plaintiff would
also need an “unreasonable number and length of rest periods” in order to complete a normal
workday and workweek. (Id. at 386.) The ALJ gave “little weight” to the findings because “most
are vague notations of limitation without any specificity or work-related details regarding the
extent of the limitation.” (Id. at 24.) Regarding the exertional and manipulative activities, the ALJ

found that “the medical evidence of record includes very few findings supporting any symptoms
or limitations and no findings supporting extreme, disabling symptoms and limitations.” (Id.) The
Magistrate Judge found that substantial evidence supported the ALJ’s decision. (Doc. No. 19 at 78.)
The Magistrate Judge properly held, and it is not contested (Doc. No. 20 at 1), that the ALJ
may properly give less-than-controlling weight to a treating physician if the opinion is inconsistent
with the other substantial evidence in the case record. (Doc. No. 19 at 7 (citing Gayheart v. Comm’r
of Soc. Sec., 710 F.3d 365, 376 (6th Cir. 2013)). The ALJ and Magistrate Judge, as well as the
Court, have reviewed all the “voluminous” medical records in this case and Dr. Cummings “did
not order many tests like X-rays or MRIs, and when he did a physical examination of Plaintiff . . .
he did not note any significant physical abnormalities, nor did he report symptoms like abnormal
reflexes, decreased muscle strength, limitation of range of motion, atrophy, or other matters
normally associated with debilitating pain or extreme restrictions on the ability to perform basic
activities like sitting, standing, walking, lifting, or carrying.” (Doc. No. 19 at 8.) Coupled with the
conservative treatment history, the Court finds that substantial evidence supports the ALJ’s
decision to discount Dr. Cummings’ Medical Source Statement is supported by substantial
evidence in the record.
For the foregoing reasons, the Report and Recommendation (Doc. No. 19) is ADOPTED,
and the final decision of the Commissioner is AFFIRMED. Plaintiff’s Motion for Judgment on
the Record (Doc. No. 16) is DENIED. The Clerk shall enter judgment in accordance with Federal
Rule of Civil Procedure 58.

2

IT IS SO ORDERED.
____________________________________
WAVERLY D. CRENSHAW, JR.
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

3