Murdock v. Commissioner, Social Security Administration

Filing 16

ORDER adopting 14 Report and Recommendation. The Commissioner is AFFIRMED and the complaint is dismissed with prejudice. Ordered that any motion not previously ruled on is denied. Signed by Judge Ron Clark on 9/14/16. (tkd, )

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION DIXIE MURDOCK, Plaintiff, v. COMMISSIONER, SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, Defendant. § § § § § § § § CIVIL ACTION No. 6:15-cv-795 ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE Plaintiff Dixie Murdock initiated this civil action pursuant to Social Security Act, Section 205(g) for judicial review of the Commissioner’s denial of Plaintiff’s application for Social Security benefits. The case was referred to United States Magistrate Judge John D. Love, who issued a Report and Recommendation concluding that the decision of the Commissioner should be affirmed and the action dismissed with prejudice. The Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (Doc. No. 14), which contains his findings, conclusions, and recommendation for the disposition of this action, has been presented for consideration. Plaintiff has filed an objection to the Report and Recommendation (Doc. No. 15). Specifically, Plaintiff objects to the Magistrate Judge’s finding “that the ALJ correctly applied the applicable legal standards in assessing Ms. Murdock’s credibility, residual functional capacity (“RFC”), and ability to perform work…” Id. at 1. In her objections, Plaintiff does not state any specific reason why she contends the Magistrate Judge’s findings were erroneous, but instead simply reiterates that “the ALJ failed to apply the applicable legal standards” and “substantial evidence does not support the findings.” Id. at 2. The record reveals that the Magistrate Judge thoroughly considered the ALJ’s credibility, RFC, and ability to 1 perform work findings in his Report and Recommendation, and found that the ALJ properly considered all relevant factors and carefully considered the objective medical evidence in rendering his findings. (Doc. No. 14, at 11–14.) As such, the Magistrate Judge did not err in concluding that the ALJ’s findings are supported by substantial evidence. Therefore, the Court hereby adopts the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge as the findings and conclusions of the Court. It is accordingly ORDERED that the decision of the Commissioner is AFFIRMED and the complaint is hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. It is further ORDERED that any motion not previously ruled on is DENIED. So Ordered and Signed Sep 14, 2016 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?