Harris v. Commissioner SSA
Filing
21
ORDER OVERRULING OBJECTIONS AND ADOPTING 8 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS. Signed by District Judge Ron Clark on 1/31/19. (ljw, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
LUFKIN DIVISION
TOMMY E. HARRIS,
Plaintiff
v.
COMMISSIONER OF THE SOCIAL
SECURITY ADMINISTRATION,
Defendant
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
No. 9:17-CV-00141
ORDER OVERRULING OBJECTIONS AND ADOPTING
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
The Plaintiff requests judicial review of a final decision of the Commissioner of Social
Security Administration with respect to his application for disability-based benefits. This matter
has been referred to the Honorable Keith Giblin, United States Magistrate Judge, at Beaumont,
Texas, for consideration pursuant to applicable laws and orders of this court. The magistrate judge
submitted a report recommending that the decision of the Commissioner be affirmed. The court
has considered the report and recommendation filed on September 11, 2018 (Doc. No. 18) and the
Plaintiff’s objections. (Doc. No. 20.) The court has conducted a de novo review of the objections
in relation to the pleadings and the applicable law. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). After careful
consideration, the court concludes that the Plaintiff’s objections are without merit. 1 The court
concludes that the magistrate judge correctly identified and discussed the points of error argued by
plaintiff and analyzed those points correctly. The magistrate judge properly examined the entire
1. The Plaintiff’s objections to the Report and Recommendation are liberally construed to assert that substantial
evidence does not support the ALJ’s decision. Plaintiff attaches additional new medical records to support his
position that he is disabled. The ALJ and Magistrate Judge applied the correct standard in assessing Harris’
impairments and ability to perform work related activities. The ALJ sets out the proper legal standard of disability
under the Act in his decision and the agency’s five step sequential evaluation process for evaluating disability under
the Act. Substantial evidence supports the ALJ’s decision and the additional evidence is cumulative, not likely to
change the outcome of the case, and Plaintiff failed to show good cause for not presenting the medical evidence
earlier. The new evidence does not warrant a remand.
record to determine that substantial evidence supports the administrative law judge’s determination
decision and the Commissioner’s denial of benefits.
Accordingly, all of the Plaintiffs objections are OVERRULED. The findings of fact and
conclusions of law of the magistrate judge are correct and the report of the magistrate judge is
ADOPTED. A final judgment will be entered in this case in accordance with the magistrate
judge’s recommendation.
So ORDERED and SIGNED January 31, 2019.
____________________________
Ron Clark, Senior District Judge
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?