ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

BENJAMIN H. SETTLE, District Judge.

This matter comes before the Court on the Report and Recommendation ("R&R") of the Honorable J. Richard Creatura, United States Magistrate Judge (Dkt. 24), and Plaintiff Nina Westerhoff's ("Westerhoff") objections to the R&R (Dkt. 25).

On March 24, 2014, Judge Creatura issued the R&R recommending that the Court affirm the decision of the Administrative Law Judge ("ALJ") that Westerhoff was not disabled. Dkt. 24. On May 8, 2014, Westerhoff filed objections. Dkt. 25.

The district judge must determine de novo any part of the magistrate judge's disposition that has been properly objected to. The district judge may accept, reject, or 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, the Court has reviewed the record and the relevant pleadings and agrees with Judge Creatura on all issues. The one issue that concerned the Court was Westerhoff's argument that the ALJ failed to take into account all of Westerhoff's limitations. Dkt. 25 at 10-11. Dr. Terilee Wingate assessed Westerhoff with a moderate functional limitation in situations with public contact. TR 393. Westerhoff argues that the ALJ's failure to acknowledge this limitation is harmful error because "it would prevent Westerhoff from performing the past relevant work that the ALJ concluded she could perform." Dkt. 25 at 3. The Court disagrees. Even if the ALJ committed error, it was not harmful. Both of the jobs that the ALJ found Westerhoff was able to perform require little, if any, public contact. TR 25 (jobs DOT #166.267-034 and DOT #169.167-064). Therefore, the error, if any, was harmless.

The Court having considered the R&R, Westerhoff's objections, and the remaining record, does hereby find and order as follows: