Fouse v. Commissioner of SSA
Filing
16
MEMORANDUM ORDER ADOPTING the 12 Report and Recommendations. The social security action is AFFIRMED. Signed by Judge Michael H. Schneider on 7/16/14. (bas, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
OF THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
TEXARKANA DIVISION
ELIZABETH RENAY FOUSE
§
VS.
§
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL
SECURITY ADMINISTRATION
§
CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:13-CV-00029
MEMORANDUM ORDER
The above-entitled and numbered civil action was heretofore referred to United States
Magistrate Judge Caroline M. Craven pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636. The Report of the Magistrate
Judge which contains her proposed findings of fact and recommendations for the disposition of such
action has been presented for consideration.
Plaintiff filed objections to the Report and
Recommendation. The Court conducted a de novo review of the magistrate judge’s findings and
conclusions.
Plaintiff objects to the magistrate judge’s recommendation that Plaintiff’s above-entitled and
numbered social security cause of action be affirmed. Specifically, Plaintiff asserts the Report and
Recommendation fails to address the combination of Plaintiff’s mental impairments and chronic
pain. According to Plaintiff, the medical records show she has suffered from depression and anxiety
and she has also been suicidal related to her pain. Plaintiff asserts the ALJ’s hypothetical to the
vocational expert did not include Plaintiff’s psychologically-based symptoms, such as mental
confusion, anxiety, mental disturbance, and depression.
After reviewing the transcript, the briefs of the parties, and the Report and Recommendation,
the Court finds Plaintiff’s objections are without merit. The Court agrees with the magistrate judge
that the ALJ performed a thorough credibility analysis and explained why he discounted Plaintiff’s
subjective complaints. As noted by the magistrate judge, the ALJ considered Plaintiff’s physical and
mental limitations in determinating Plaintiff’s residual functional capacity, and the ALJ’s
assessment accommodated Plaintiff’s supported complaints of chronic pain. The Court finds the
ALJ did not err by excluding unsupported claimed limitations from his hypothetical questions to the
vocational expert. The ALJ asked the vocational expert hypothetical questions that reasonably
incorporated the restrictions and impairments which the record as a whole supported. Substantial
.
evidence supports the ALJ’s decision.
The Court is of the opinion that the findings and conclusions of the magistrate judge are
correct. Therefore, the Court hereby adopts the Report of the United States Magistrate Judge as the
findings and conclusions of this Court. Accordingly, it is hereby
ORDERED that the above-entitled Social Security action is AFFIRMED.
It is SO ORDERED.
SIGNED this 16th day of July, 2014.
____________________________________
MICHAEL H. SCHNEIDER
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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?