Turley v. Colvin
Filing
22
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER adopting and incorporating the 20 Proposed Findings and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge; affirming the Commissioner's final decision; granting judgment in favor of the Commissioner; and dismissing and striking this civil action from the docket. Signed by Judge John T. Copenhaver, Jr. on 9/21/2015. (cc: counsel of record; United States Magistrate Judge) (taq)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA
AT CHARLESTON
DONALD RAYMOND TURLEY,
Plaintiff,
v.
CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:14-cv-17373
CAROLYN W. COLVIN,
Acting Commissioner of Social Security,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
On June 2, 2014, the plaintiff, Donald Turley,
instituted this action seeking judicial review of the
Commissioner's final decision pursuant to 42 U.S.C.A. § 405(g).
The sole issue before the court is whether the decision denying
Turley’s claim for income and benefits is supported by
substantial evidence.
See 45 U.S.C.A. § 405(g).
By standing order this action was referred to the
Honorable R. Clarke VanDervort, United States Magistrate Judge.
On August 31, 2015, the magistrate judge filed his Proposed
Findings and Recommendation ("PF&R").
On September 14, 2015,
Turley filed his objections to the magistrate judge’s PF&R.
In the PF&R, the magistrate judge recommends that the
court deny Turley’s motion for judgment on the pleadings, grant
the defendant’s motion for judgment on the pleadings, affirm the
final decision of the Commissioner, and dismiss this matter from
the court’s docket.
Turley has two objections.
First, he
objects to the magistrate judge’s finding that the ALJ did not
err in failing to assign weight to the opinion of a consultative
psychological examiner who found evidence of some memory
deficits and mood problems after examining Turley.
Second,
Turley objects to the magistrate judge’s finding that the ALJ’s
failure to perform a function by function analysis in
determining Turley’s residual functioning capacity was harmless
error.
Turley’s objections follow, almost verbatim, the
arguments made in his motion for judgment on the pleadings.
These matters have been extensively and thoroughly explored in
the briefings and by the magistrate judge, whose conclusions
have a sound legal basis and substantial evidentiary support.
Thus, having considered the objections and having reviewed the
matter de novo, and having found that the decision denying
Turley’s claim for income and benefits is supported by
substantial evidence, see 45 U.S.C.A. § 405(g), the court adopts
and incorporates herein the magistrate judge’s proposed findings
and recommendation.
For the reasons stated, it is ORDERED as
follows:
1.
That the PF&R be, and it hereby is, adopted and
incorporated herein;
2.
That the Commissioner’s final decision be, and it
hereby is, affirmed;
3.
That judgment be, and it hereby is, granted in favor
of the Commissioner; and,
4.
That this civil action be, and it hereby is, dismissed
and stricken from the docket.
The Clerk is directed to forward copies of this
written opinion and order to all counsel of record and the
United States Magistrate Judge.
DATED: September 21, 2015
John T. Copenhaver, Jr.
United States 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?