From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hall v. Commissioner of Social Security

United States District Court, N.D. Ohio, Eastern Division
Jan 20, 2011
CASE NO. 09 CV 2514 (N.D. Ohio Jan. 20, 2011)

Summary

finding that "[a]lthough the ALJ did not specifically state the weight he accorded to the non-medical sources' opinions, the ALJ's discussion of all of the evidence on the record . . . makes clear to a subsequent reviewer his reasoning for not fully incorporating the findings contained in [those opinions] into his RFC determination—lack of consistency."

Summary of this case from Washington v. Soc. Sec. Admin.

Opinion

CASE NO. 09 CV 2514.

January 20, 2011


Memorandum of Opinion and Order


INTRODUCTION

This matter is before the Court upon the Report and Recommendation of former Magistrate Judge Benita Y. Pearson (Doc. 22). This is a social security case. No objections have been filed. For the following reasons, the Court ACCEPTS the Report and Recommendation and the decision of the Commissioner is AFFIRMED.

STANDARD OF REVIEW

When objections are made to a Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, the district court reviews the case de novo. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b) provides in pertinent part:

The district judge to whom the case is assigned shall make a de novo determination upon the record, or after additional evidence, of any portion of the magistrate judge's disposition to which specific written objection has been made in accordance with this rule. The district judge may accept, reject, or modify the recommended decision, receive further evidence, or recommit the matter to the magistrate judge with instructions.

As stated in the Advisory Committee Notes, "When no timely objection is filed, the court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation." In Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985), the Court held, "It does not appear that Congress intended to require district court review of a magistrate judge's factual or legal conclusions, under a de novo or any other standard, when neither party objects to those findings."

DECISION

This Court, having reviewed the Report and Recommendation and finding no clear error, hereby accepts the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation. In accordance with that recommendation, judgment is entered in favor of the Commissioner for the reasons stated by the Magistrate Judge and the Report and Recommendation is incorporated herein by reference.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: 1/20/11


Summaries of

Hall v. Commissioner of Social Security

United States District Court, N.D. Ohio, Eastern Division
Jan 20, 2011
CASE NO. 09 CV 2514 (N.D. Ohio Jan. 20, 2011)

finding that "[a]lthough the ALJ did not specifically state the weight he accorded to the non-medical sources' opinions, the ALJ's discussion of all of the evidence on the record . . . makes clear to a subsequent reviewer his reasoning for not fully incorporating the findings contained in [those opinions] into his RFC determination—lack of consistency."

Summary of this case from Washington v. Soc. Sec. Admin.
Case details for

Hall v. Commissioner of Social Security

Case Details

Full title:Frederick H. Hall, Plaintiff, v. Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant

Court:United States District Court, N.D. Ohio, Eastern Division

Date published: Jan 20, 2011

Citations

CASE NO. 09 CV 2514 (N.D. Ohio Jan. 20, 2011)

Citing Cases

Washington v. Soc. Sec. Admin.

Given that ALJ Shimer carefully detailed NP Brensike's opinion in his summary of the medical evidence, it is…

Southward v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec.

See Hall v. Astrue, No. 1:09 CV 2514, 2010 WL 5621291, at *9-10 (N.D. Ohio Dec. 23, 2010) ("[A]lthough the…