ORDER

P.K. HOLMES, III, Chief District Judge.

The Court has received a report and recommendation (Doc. 15) from United States Magistrate Judge Erin L. Wiedemann. Plaintiff has filed objections (Doc. 16) and Defendant has filed a response (Doc. 17). The Magistrate recommends that the Court affirm the ALJ's decision and dismiss Plaintiff's complaint with prejudice. The Court has conducted de novo review of those portions of the report and recommendation to which Plaintiff has objected. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).

This case was previously remanded to the Commissioner for further review. Plaintiff's objection is that the ALJ erred on remand in failing to find Plaintiff disabled because a pulmonary function study conducted while this case was on remand demonstrated that Plaintiff was disabled under 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(a)(4)(iii) and (5)(d). Defendant responds that after Plaintiff's claim was initially denied, Plaintiff filed a subsequent application. On the subsequent application, the ALJ hearing that claim determined that Plaintiff was disabled. Meanwhile, on remand of this claim, the ALJ determined that the relevant period under consideration ended on April 20, 2015, when Plaintiff filed his subsequent application. The ALJ then determined during step three of the five-step sequential evaluation process that the medical evidence for the relevant period did not demonstrate that Plaintiff's impairment met or equaled a listed impairment.

The ALJ did not err in failing to find Plaintiff disabled at step three on the basis of the pulmonary function study. The pulmonary function study was conducted well after the relevant time period, and medical evidence from the relevant time period is substantial enough to support the ALJ's finding that Plaintiff did not at that time have an impairment that met or equaled a listed impairment. Plaintiff's objection offers neither law nor fact requiring departure from the report and recommendation, which is ADOPTED IN ITS ENTIRETY.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the decision of the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration to deny Plaintiff's claim for supplemental security income is AFFIRMED and this case is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. Judgment will be entered accordingly.

IT IS ORDERED.