Filed: Mar. 27, 2019
Latest Update: Mar. 27, 2019
Summary: ORDER LISA GODBEY WOOD , District Judge . The Court has conducted an independent and de novo review of the entire record and concurs with the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, dkt. no. 18. The Court has additionally considered Plaintiff's Objections to the Report and Recommendation, dkt. no. 19. For the reasons set forth below, the Court OVERRULES Plaintiff's Objections and ADOPTS the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation as the opinion of the Court. In her Objection
Summary: ORDER LISA GODBEY WOOD , District Judge . The Court has conducted an independent and de novo review of the entire record and concurs with the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, dkt. no. 18. The Court has additionally considered Plaintiff's Objections to the Report and Recommendation, dkt. no. 19. For the reasons set forth below, the Court OVERRULES Plaintiff's Objections and ADOPTS the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation as the opinion of the Court. In her Objections..
More
ORDER
LISA GODBEY WOOD, District Judge.
The Court has conducted an independent and de novo review of the entire record and concurs with the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, dkt. no. 18. The Court has additionally considered Plaintiff's Objections to the Report and Recommendation, dkt. no. 19. For the reasons set forth below, the Court OVERRULES Plaintiff's Objections and ADOPTS the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation as the opinion of the Court.
In her Objections, Plaintiff asserts the Court should reject the Report and Recommendation and credit the opinion of her long-time treating physician that she would miss at least three days from work a month and needs to elevate her legs during an eight-hour workday. Id. at p. 5.
Plaintiff's Objections, as well as her initial pleadings, serve to underscore her dissatisfaction with the Administrative Law Judge's ("ALJ") determination that she is not disabled within the meaning of the Social Security Act. In addition, it appears Plaintiff wishes for this Court to re-weigh the evidence presented to the ALJ, which this Court cannot do. A reviewing court does not "decide facts anew, reweigh the evidence or substitute" its judgment for that of the Commissioner. Dyer v. Barnhart, 395 F.3d 1206, 1210 (11th Cir. 2005). Even if the evidence preponderates against the Commissioner's factual findings, the court must affirm a decision supported by substantial evidence. Id. As the Magistrate Judge correctly concluded, substantial evidence supports the ALJ's determination to give moderate weight to Plaintiff's treating physician's opinion. Dkt. No. 18, pp. 11-14. The ALJ recognized the longstanding relationship between Plaintiff and her treating physician, yet the ALJ determined the record as a whole did not support the treating physician's opinions. Dkt. No. 10-3, pp. 14-15. The ALJ provided reasons to discount partially Plaintiff's treating physician's opinion, and the ALJ's determination is supported by substantial evidence. Dkt. No. 18, pp. 11-14.
The Court OVERRULES Plaintiff's Objections and ADOPTS the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation as the opinion of the Court. The Court AFFIRMS the decision of the Commissioner and DIRECTS the Clerk of Court to CLOSE this case and enter the appropriate judgment of dismissal.
SO ORDERED.
