From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cooley v. Soc. Sec. Admin.

United States District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana
Apr 6, 2022
Civil Action 21-840 (E.D. La. Apr. 6, 2022)

Opinion

Civil Action 21-840

04-06-2022

BRYAN M. COOLEY v. SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION


SECTION “T” (5)

ORDER

GREG GERARD GUIDRY, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

On February 4, 2022, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation (“the Report”), recommending that Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment be DENIED, the Commissioner's cross-motion be GRANTED, and the Plaintiff's case be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.[ The Report concluded there is “substantial evidence” supporting the Administrative Law Judge's (“ALJ”) finding that the “Plaintiff is not disabled” and “can perform his past relevant work as a warehouse manager.”[ The Plaintiff filed an objection to the Report, primarily raising two arguments.[ First, the Plaintiff argues the ALJ improperly ruled on his case after it became clear his prior managerial work was a “composite job.”[ Second, the Plaintiff contends the Social Security Administration (“SSA”) improperly argued that he failed to allege an inability to perform his prior work.[

R. Doc. 19.

Id. at 2.

R. Doc. 20.

Id. at 4-5.

Id. at 4-5.

Having carefully considered the administrative record, the applicable law, the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, and Plaintiff's Objections, the Court OVERRULES Plaintiff's Objections, APPROVES the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation and ADOPTS the Report as the Court's opinion herein. As noted by the Magistrate Judge, it is “unnecessary” to explore the nature of the Plaintiff's job because the “Plaintiff does not allege an inability” to perform his past duties as a warehouse manager.[ Ultimately, the Plaintiff “failed to specify a nexus between his alleged mental health limitations and his inability to work.”[ Regardless, the ALJ “properly concluded that [the Plaintiff] can indeed perform light work” despite his unsupported “mental limitations” claims.

R. Doc. 19 at 7.

Id. at 7.

Id. at 11.

CONCLUSION

IT IS ORDERED that the final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security denying the claim of Bryan M. Cooley for disability insurance benefits (DIB) be AFFIRMED, and this action be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE


Summaries of

Cooley v. Soc. Sec. Admin.

United States District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana
Apr 6, 2022
Civil Action 21-840 (E.D. La. Apr. 6, 2022)
Case details for

Cooley v. Soc. Sec. Admin.

Case Details

Full title:BRYAN M. COOLEY v. SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION

Court:United States District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana

Date published: Apr 6, 2022

Citations

Civil Action 21-840 (E.D. La. Apr. 6, 2022)

Citing Cases

Walter v. Kijakazi

, report and recommendation adopted, No. CV 20-2374, 2022 WL 1238628 (E.D. La. Apr. 26, 2022); Cooley v. Soc.…

Garza v. Kijakazi

Applying Collins, district courts in this circuit and across the country have held that plaintiffs raising…