Filed: Mar. 24, 2016
Latest Update: Mar. 24, 2016
Summary: ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE MICHAEL H. SCHNEIDER , District Judge . The Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, which contains her findings, conclusions, and recommendation for the disposition of this action, has been presented for consideration. The Report and Recommendation recommends that the decision of the Commissioner be affirmed and the complaint be dismissed. Plaintiff has filed a written objection to the R & R. Having
Summary: ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE MICHAEL H. SCHNEIDER , District Judge . The Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, which contains her findings, conclusions, and recommendation for the disposition of this action, has been presented for consideration. The Report and Recommendation recommends that the decision of the Commissioner be affirmed and the complaint be dismissed. Plaintiff has filed a written objection to the R & R. Having m..
More
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
MICHAEL H. SCHNEIDER, District Judge.
The Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, which contains her findings, conclusions, and recommendation for the disposition of this action, has been presented for consideration. The Report and Recommendation recommends that the decision of the Commissioner be affirmed and the complaint be dismissed. Plaintiff has filed a written objection to the R & R.
Having made a de novo review of the objection filed by Plaintiff, the Court finds that the findings, conclusions and recommendation of the Magistrate Judge are correct. Plaintiff contends in the objection that the ALJ and the Report of the Magistrate Judge incorrectly determined there was no error in the assessment of Plaintiff's credibility. The Magistrate Judge's Report fully addresses this issue. As the Magistrate Judge pointed out, the ALJ did not entirely reject Plaintiff's allegations. SSR 96-7p, 1996 WL 374186, at *4 (the adjudicator need not totally accept or totally reject the claimant's statements).
The ALJ incorporated Plaintiff's testimony into its assessment by finding that Plaintiff could perform medium work. See Tr. at 13. Therefore, despite Plaintiff's contention otherwise, the ALJ considered Plaintiff's testimony and used it to establish Plaintiff's residual functional capacity. Considering Plaintiff's subjective reports together with the medical findings from the adjudicated period, the Magistrate Judge properly found that the ALJ correctly determined that Plaintiff's statements concerning the intensity, persistence, and limiting effects of his symptoms were not entirely credible. See Tr. at 13-15.
Therefore, Plaintiff's objection is without merit and will be overruled. There is substantial evidence in the record supporting the Commissioner's decision. The findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge are therefore adopted as those of the Court.
In light of the foregoing, it is
ORDERED that Plaintiff's objections are hereby OVERRULED. It is further
ORDERED that the decision of the Commissioner is AFFIRMED and the complaint is hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. It is further
ORDERED that any motion not previously ruled on is DENIED.
