Filed: Sep. 13, 2019
Latest Update: Sep. 13, 2019
Summary: ORDER CATHERINE C. EAGLES , District Judge . The Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge was filed in accordance with 28 U.S.C. 636(b), and, on August 6, 2019, was served on the parties. Docs. 16, 17. The plaintiff filed Objections to the Recommendation, Doc. 18, and the defendant responded in opposition. Doc. 19. The Court has reviewed the portions of the Magistrate Judge's report to which objection was made and has made a de novo determination in accord with the Magistrate
Summary: ORDER CATHERINE C. EAGLES , District Judge . The Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge was filed in accordance with 28 U.S.C. 636(b), and, on August 6, 2019, was served on the parties. Docs. 16, 17. The plaintiff filed Objections to the Recommendation, Doc. 18, and the defendant responded in opposition. Doc. 19. The Court has reviewed the portions of the Magistrate Judge's report to which objection was made and has made a de novo determination in accord with the Magistrate ..
More
ORDER
CATHERINE C. EAGLES, District Judge.
The Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge was filed in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), and, on August 6, 2019, was served on the parties. Docs. 16, 17. The plaintiff filed Objections to the Recommendation, Doc. 18, and the defendant responded in opposition. Doc. 19. The Court has reviewed the portions of the Magistrate Judge's report to which objection was made and has made a de novo determination in accord with the Magistrate Judge's report. The Court adopts the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation.
In her objections, the plaintiff contends that the errors identified by the Magistrate Judge were not harmless. However, she relies on arguments she did not make before the Magistrate Judge and she does not point to evidence in the record to support the conclusions she now says the ALJ should have reached. The Court agrees with the Magistrate Judge that the errors were harmless.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Commissioner's decision finding no disability is AFFIRMED, that the plaintiff's Motion to Reverse the Decision of the Commissioner of Social Security, Doc. 11, is DENIED, that the defendant's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings, Doc. 14, is GRANTED, and that this matter is DISMISSED with prejudice.
A Judgment will be entered contemporaneously with this Order.
