Torres v. Berryhill

Filing 18

ORDER ADOPTING 15 Report and Recommendation. The final decision of the Commissioner is AFFIRMED and this case is dismissed with prejudice. Signed by Judge Ricardo S. Martinez. (TH)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

7
8

MARIA SOLEDAD TORRES,

Case No. C17-5786-RSM

9
Plaintiff,

ORDER DISMISSING CASE

10
11
12
13

v.
NANCY A. BERRYHILL, Deputy
Commissioner of Social Security for
Operations,

14

Defendant.

15
16

The Court, after careful consideration of Plaintiff’s Complaint, the parties’ briefs, all

17

papers and exhibits filed in support and opposition thereto, the Report and Recommendation

18

(“R&R”) of the Honorable James P. Donohue, the Objections and response thereto, and the

19

balance of the record, does hereby find and ORDER:

20

(1)

The Court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation as to the merits, but

21

clarifies the Court’s conclusion as to the procedural posture of this case. Plaintiff

22

first objects to Judge Donohue’s R&R on the basis that he applied the wrong legal

23

standard to Dr. Weiss’s opinion. As the government points out, Plaintiff’s

24

argument is inconsistent with the law. When an examining physician’s opinion

25

is contradicted by the opinion of a non-examining state agency physician, an ALJ

26

need only provide “specific and legitimate” reasons for rejecting the examining

ORDER DISMISSING CASE
PAGE - 1

1

physician’s opinion. See Widmark v. Barnhart, 454 F.3d 1063, 1066-67 (9th Cir.

2

2006) citing Lester v. Chater, 81 F.3d 821, 830 (9th Cir. 1996). In this case, Dr.

3

Weiss’s opinion was contradicted by that of the state agency psychologist. Tr.

4

77-79.

5

assessing this case. Further, for the reasons explained by Judge Donohue, this

6

Court agrees that the ALJ provided multiple specific and legitimate reasons to

7

discount Dr. Weiss’s opinion, and therefore Plaintiff failed to demonstrate that

8

the ALJ committed reversible error. Likewise, the Court finds that, for the

9

reasons set forth by Judge Donohue, the ALJ provided clear and convincing

10

reasons to discount Plaintiff’s subjective testimony, and therefore the ALJ did not

11

commit reversible error in that respect.

12

(2)

Accordingly, Judge Donahue applied the correct legal standard in

The final decision of the Commissioner is AFFIRMED and this case is dismissed

13

with prejudice. The Court clarified that this matter is not to be Reversed and

14

Remanded as Judge Donohue stated in the conclusion of his R&R. See Dkt. #15

15

at 14.

16
17
18

(3)

The Clerk of the Court is directed to send copies of this Order to the parties and
to Judge Donohue.

DATED this 30th day of July, 2018.

19

21

A

22

RICARDO S. MARTINEZ
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

20

23
24
25
26

ORDER DISMISSING CASE
PAGE - 2