Larkin v. Berryhill

Filing 22

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION by Judge Benjamin H. Settle re 17 Report and Recommendations. (TG)

Download PDF
1 2 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA 4 5 JACQUELINE R. LARKIN, 6 7 8 Plaintiff, v. CASE NO. C17-1689 BHS ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION NANCY A. BERRYHILL, Acting Commissioner of Social Security 9 Defendant. 10 11 This matter comes before the Court on the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) 12 of the Honorable James P. Donohue, United States Magistrate Judge (Dkt. 17), Plaintiff 13 Jacqueline Larkin’s (“Larkin”) objections to the R&R (Dkt. 18), and Larkin’s motion for 14 leave to file an overlength brief (Dkt. 21). 15 On June 22, 2018, Judge Donahue issued the R&R recommending that the Court 16 affirm the Administrative Law Judge’s (“ALJ”) denial of benefits. Dkt. 17. On July 2, 17 2018, Larkin filed objections. Dkt. 18. On July 13, 2018, the Government responded 18 and noted that Larkin’s objections exceeded the twelve-page limit. Dkt. 20 at 1 n.1. On 19 July 13, 2018, Larkin filed a motion for leave to file an overlength brief requesting that 20 the Court accept her overlength objections. Dkt. 20. 1 21 1 22 The Court grants the motion even though the objections needlessly include much of Larkin’s opening brief. ORDER - 1 1 The district judge must determine de novo any part of the magistrate judge’s 2 disposition that has been properly objected to. The district judge may accept, reject, or 3 modify the recommended disposition; receive further evidence; or return the matter to the 4 magistrate judge with instructions. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3). 5 In this case, Larkin objects to the R&R’s recommendations regarding development 6 of the record and the ALJ’s rejection of medical testimony. First, Judge Donahue 7 concludes that the ALJ did not err in developing the record because Larkin failed to show 8 that any of the missing records would support the rejected medical opinions. Dkt. 17 at 9 9–11. Larkin objects to this conclusion and continues to argue that the ALJ has the duty 10 to fully develop the record despite Larkin being represented by counsel and regardless of 11 the relevance of any missing records. Dkt. 18 at 12–18. Larkin, however, cites no law 12 for her proposed expansive scope of the ALJ’s duty to develop the record. In light of 13 Larkin’s lack of authority, the Court agrees with Judge Donahue that this argument is 14 based on nothing more than Larkin’s counsel’s speculation. Dkt. 17 at 11. Therefore, the 15 Court adopts the R&R on this issue. 16 Second, Judge Donahue concludes that the ALJ did not err in rejecting medical 17 evidence. Dkt. 17 at 11–16. Regarding the state agency consultants, Larkin fails to show 18 that these consultants opined on any limitation that the ALJ rejected. Thus, the Court 19 adopts Judge Donahue’s conclusion that the ALJ need not provide reasons for giving 20 opinions partial weight if the ALJ incorporates all of the limitations from the medical 21 opinion. Regarding Dr. Brenda Havellana, Larkin contends that the ALJ erred by 22 rejecting this opinion because it was based on Larkin’s self-report. Dkt. 18 at 11. This, ORDER - 2 1 however, was only one of the reasons the ALJ gave the opinion little weight. AR 27. 2 The ALJ also found that the medical findings were not consistent with an opinion of 3 severe limitations and Dr. Havellana failed to provide any narrative information or 4 explanations for Larkin’s severe limitations. Id. Judge Donahue relied on all three 5 reasons to uphold the ALJ’s decision. Dkt. 17 at 13–14. The Court agrees with Judge 6 Donahue that the ALJ provided sufficient reasons to reject Dr. Havellana’s opinion of 7 severe limitations. 8 9 Therefore, the Court having considered the R&R, Larkin’s objections, and the remaining record, does hereby find and order as follows: 10 (1) Larkin’s motion for leave to file an overlength brief is GRANTED; 11 (2) The R&R is ADOPTED; 12 (3) The ALJ’s decision is AFFIRMED; and 13 (4) The Clerk shall enter a JUDGMENT and close the case. 14 Dated this 28th day of August, 2018. A 15 16 BENJAMIN H. SETTLE United States District Judge 17 18 19 20 21 22 ORDER - 3

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?