CRAWFORD v. COLVIN, 1:15-cv-00135-MP-GRJ. (2016)
Court: District Court, N.D. Florida
Number: infdco20160929a66
Visitors: 25
Filed: Sep. 28, 2016
Latest Update: Sep. 28, 2016
Summary: ORDER MARK E. WALKER , District Judge . This cause comes on for consideration upon the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation dated April 25, 2016. (ECF No. 18). The parties have been furnished a copy of the Report and Recommendation and have been afforded an opportunity to file objections pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section 636(b)(1). Plaintiff filed objections at ECF No. 21, which the Court has reviewed. Having considered the Report and Recommendation and the objectio
Summary: ORDER MARK E. WALKER , District Judge . This cause comes on for consideration upon the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation dated April 25, 2016. (ECF No. 18). The parties have been furnished a copy of the Report and Recommendation and have been afforded an opportunity to file objections pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section 636(b)(1). Plaintiff filed objections at ECF No. 21, which the Court has reviewed. Having considered the Report and Recommendation and the objection..
More
ORDER
MARK E. WALKER, District Judge.
This cause comes on for consideration upon the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation dated April 25, 2016. (ECF No. 18). The parties have been furnished a copy of the Report and Recommendation and have been afforded an opportunity to file objections pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section 636(b)(1). Plaintiff filed objections at ECF No. 21, which the Court has reviewed. Having considered the Report and Recommendation and the objections, I have determined that the Report and Recommendation should be adopted. The Court agrees with the Magistrate Judge that substantial evidence supported the Administrative Law Judge's findings with regard to plaintiff's moderate nonexertional limitations. The Magistrate Judge also correctly found that plaintiff offered no evidence to support the claim that the hypothetical question posed to the vocational expert should have included a limitation based on plaintiff's putative unreliability. The record evidence showed that plaintiff, when she was on her medications, had only the moderate nonexertional limitations found by the Administrative Law Judge and incorporated in the hypothetical question to the vocational expert. Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED:
The Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation is adopted and incorporated by reference in this order. The decision of the Commissioner, denying benefits, is affirmed. The Clerk is directed to close the file.
SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
