ABEL v. ASTRUE, 2:10-cv-566-FtM-UA-DNF. (2012)
Court: District Court, M.D. Florida
Number: infdco20120305923
Visitors: 13
Filed: Mar. 05, 2012
Latest Update: Mar. 05, 2012
Summary: ORDER RICHARD A. LAZZARA, District Judge. This cause is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation of United States District Judge Douglas N. Frazier recommending that the decision of Defendant denying Plaintiff's application for a period of disability, disability insurance benefits, and Supplement Security Income benefits be affirmed. 1 Plaintiff has filed an objection to which Defendant has responded. 2 The Court has undertaken a de novo review of the record in conjunction with t
Summary: ORDER RICHARD A. LAZZARA, District Judge. This cause is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation of United States District Judge Douglas N. Frazier recommending that the decision of Defendant denying Plaintiff's application for a period of disability, disability insurance benefits, and Supplement Security Income benefits be affirmed. 1 Plaintiff has filed an objection to which Defendant has responded. 2 The Court has undertaken a de novo review of the record in conjunction with th..
More
ORDER
RICHARD A. LAZZARA, District Judge.
This cause is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation of United States District Judge Douglas N. Frazier recommending that the decision of Defendant denying Plaintiff's application for a period of disability, disability insurance benefits, and Supplement Security Income benefits be affirmed.1 Plaintiff has filed an objection to which Defendant has responded.2 The Court has undertaken a de novo review of the record in conjunction with the specific objections lodged by Plaintiff to the Report and Recommendation — that the magistrate judge improperly upheld the administrative law judge's consideration of Plaintiff's mental impairment and tinnitus as not severe and that her composite job of office worker and data entry clerk, which she performed as past relevant work, is incompatible with the RFC3 for light work— as required by Eleventh Circuit precedent.4 After doing so, the Court is of the opinion that the Report and Recommendation is due to be adopted, confirmed, and approved in all respects because Plaintiff's objections have no merit in the face of the record and Defendant's decision is supported by substantial evidence.
Accordingly, it is ordered and adjudged as follows:
(1) The Report and Recommendation of the magistrate judge (Dkt. 24) is adopted, confirmed, and approved in all respects and made a part of this order for all purposes, including appellate review.
(2) Defendant's decision is affirmed.
(3) The Clerk is directed to enter judgment for Defendant and to close this case.
DONE AND ORDERED.
FootNotes
1. See docket 24.
2. See dockets 25 and 26.
3. RFC is residual functional capacity.
4. See Macort v. Prem, Inc., 208 Fed.Appx. 781, 784 (11th Cir. 2006) (unpublished) (stating that "[w]here a proper, specific objection to the magistrate judge's report and recommendation is made, it is clear that the district court must conduct a de novo review of the issue.") (citing Stokes v. Singletary, 952 F.2d 1567, 1576 (11th Cir. 1992)).
Source: Leagle
