From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bodison v. Astrue

United States District Court, N.D. Florida, Gainesville Division
Jun 16, 2008
CASE NO. 1:07-cv-00107-MP-AK (N.D. Fla. Jun. 16, 2008)

Opinion

CASE NO. 1:07-cv-00107-MP-AK.

June 16, 2008


ORDER


This matter is before the Court on Doc. 14, Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, recommending that the Commissioner of Social Security's decision denying Plaintiff's applications for supplemental security income benefits filed under Title XVI of the Social Security Act, be affirmed. The Magistrate Judge filed the Report and Recommendation on Tuesday, May 6, 2008. The parties have been furnished a copy of the Report and have been afforded an opportunity to file objections. Pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section 636(b)(1), this Court must make a de novo review of those portions to which an objection has been made. In this instance, however, no objections were made.

After a hearing on August 31, 2006, the Administrative Law Judge ("ALJ") found that although Plaintiff had severe impairments, none of these impairments, either singly or in combination, met the listings of impairments. Because Plaintiff's limitations did not preclude her from performing other jobs existing in the national economy, the ALJ concluded that Plaintiff was not disabled under the Social Security Act. Under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), the Commissioner's decision must be affirmed if it is supported by substantial evidence and the correct legal standards have been applied. Graham v. Apfel, 129 F.3d 1420, 1422 (11th Cir. 1997).

The Court agrees with the Magistrate that there is no evidence in the record to support the claim that Plaintiff's combined limitations result in any disabling functional limitation. Because there were numerous jobs within Plaintiff's exertional level that were not beyond her cognitive abilities, the Court agrees that she was not disabled under the Social Security Act. Therefore, having considered the Report and Recommendation, I have determined that it should be adopted. Accordingly, it is hereby

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:

1. The Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, Doc. 14, is adopted and incorporated by reference in this order.
2. The decision of the Commissioner denying benefits is AFFIRMED.
DONE AND ORDERED


Summaries of

Bodison v. Astrue

United States District Court, N.D. Florida, Gainesville Division
Jun 16, 2008
CASE NO. 1:07-cv-00107-MP-AK (N.D. Fla. Jun. 16, 2008)
Case details for

Bodison v. Astrue

Case Details

Full title:DONNA M. BODISON, Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social…

Court:United States District Court, N.D. Florida, Gainesville Division

Date published: Jun 16, 2008

Citations

CASE NO. 1:07-cv-00107-MP-AK (N.D. Fla. Jun. 16, 2008)