Rouse v. Colvin

Filing 22

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS by Judge Benjamin H. Settle re 19 Objections to Report and Recommendation filed by Shawna L. Rouse. (TG)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA 1 2 3 SHAWNA L. ROUSE, Plaintiff, 4 CASE NO. C16-5134BHS-JDP ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 5 v. 6 CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, 7 Defendant. 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 This matter comes before the Court on the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) of the Honorable James P. Donohue, United States Magistrate Judge (Dkt. 17), and Plaintiff Shawna Rouse’s (“Rouse”) objections to the R&R (Dkt. 19). On October 24, 2016, Judge Donohue issued the R&R recommending that the Court affirm the Commissioner’s denial of Rouse’s application for benefits. Dkt. 17. On November 7, 2016, Rouse filed objections. Dkt. 19. The district judge must determine de novo any part of the magistrate judge’s 16 disposition that has been properly objected to. The district judge may accept, reject, or 17 18 19 20 21 22 modify the recommended disposition; receive further evidence; or return the matter to the magistrate judge with instructions. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3). In this case, Rouse objects to the R&R’s conclusions regarding her hearing loss, her credibility, and the Administrative Law Judge’s (“ALJ”) step five finding. Dkt. 17. On the issue of Rouse’s hearing, she argues that she requires work limitations beyond what the ALJ found to be her limitations. Dkt. 19 at 3–9. The Court, however, finds that ORDER - 1 1 the medical evidence does not support additional limitations and the R&R properly 2 evaluated the issues. 3 Regarding Rouse’s credibility, she argues that the ALJ erred in finding Rouse less 4 than credible. Dkt. 19 at 10. The Court, however, agrees with the R&R that one valid 5 reason exists to support the ALJ’s finding. Dkt. 17 at 12–15. Accordingly, the ALJ’s 6 determination is subject to deference, and the Court adopts the R&R on this issue. 7 Finally, Rouse argues that the Court should reject the R&R’s recommendation that 8 the Court should affirm the ALJ’s step five finding. Dkt. 19 at 11. This argument, 9 however, is based on the allegedly flawed conclusion regarding Rouse’s limitations. 10 Because the Court affirms the ALJ’s limitations, the Court also affirms the ALJ’s step 11 five finding. 12 Therefore, the Court having considered the R&R, Rouse’s objections, and the 13 remaining record, does hereby find and order as follows: 14 (1) The R&R is ADOPTED; 15 (2) The Commissioner’s denial of Rouse’s application for benefits is 16 AFFIRMED; 17 (3) This action is DISMISSED; and 18 (4) The Clerk shall close this case. 19 Dated this 18th day of January, 2017. A 20 21 BENJAMIN H. SETTLE United States District Judge 22 ORDER - 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?