Hatch, Sr. v. O'Malley

Filing 19

ORDER that the Plaintiff's Objections (ECF No. 17 ) are OVERRULED and the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (ECF No. 16 ) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED as the OPINION of the Court; Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No . 12 ) is hereby DENIED; Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 14 ) is hereby GRANTED; the decision of the Commissioner is hereby AFFIRMED; and this case is now CLOSED. SEE ORDER FOR DETAILS. Signed by District Judge David J. Novak on 3/6/2025. (adun, )

Case 3:24-cv-00075-DJN-SLS

Document 19

Filed 03/06/25

Page 1 of 6 PageID# 103

Case 3:24-cv-00075-DJN-SLS

Document 19

Filed 03/06/25

Page 2 of 6 PageID# 104

Case 3:24-cv-00075-DJN-SLS

Document 19

Filed 03/06/25

Page 3 of 6 PageID# 105

Case 3:24-cv-00075-DJN-SLS

Document 19

Filed 03/06/25

Page 4 of 6 PageID# 106

Case 3:24-cv-00075-DJN-SLS

Document 19

Filed 03/06/25

Page 5 of 6 PageID# 107

Case 3:24-cv-00075-DJN-SLS

Document 19

Filed 03/06/25

Page 6 of 6 PageID# 108

perform light work. (R. at 24.) The AL.I then went on to summarize FNP-C Blowe's opinion
which, as discussed above, was more limiting than the opinions of Ors. Spetzler and Hutcheson,
and therefore, inconsistent with them. (R. at 24.) When considering the ALJ's decision
altogether, then, the ALJ properly addressed the consistency factor with respect to FNP-C
Blowe's opinion.
As Magistrate Judge Speight explained, the ALJ applied the correct legal standards in
evaluating FNP-C Blowe's opinion, and substantial evidence supports the ALJ's determination.
(R. & R. at 12-15.) Even if this Court would reach a different conclusion or weigh the evidence
differently, it must accept the Commissioner's decision where, as here, it stands supported by
substantial evidence. Hays v. Sullivan, 907 F.2d 1453, 1456 (4th Cir. 1990).
IV.

CONCLUSION

Having reviewed the record de nova, the Court finds that the Commissioner's final
decision was supported by substantial evidence and that the Commissioner employed the correct
legal standards in reaching that decision. Accordingly, the Court hereby ORDERS that:
I. Plaintiff's Objections (ECF No. 17) are OVERRULED and the Report and
Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (ECF No. 16) is ACCEPTED and
ADOPTED as the OPINION of the Court;
2. Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 12) is hereby DENIED;
3. Defendant's Motion for Summa1y Judgment (ECF No. 14) is hereby GRANTED;
4. The decision of the Commissioner is hereby AFFIRMED; and
5. This case is now CLOSED.
Let the Clerk file this Order electronically and notify all counsel of record.
It is so ORDERED.

Isl

Richmond, Virginia
Dated: March 6, 2025

David J. Novak
United States District Judge
6