Fast v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec.

Full title: CATHERINE VIOLA FAST, Plaintiff, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY…

Court: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

Date published: Mar 28, 2012

Case. No. 10-14765 (E.D. Mich. Mar. 28, 2012)

Opinion

Case. No. 10-14765

03-28-2012

CATHERINE VIOLA FAST, Plaintiff, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant.

LAWRENCE P. ZATKOFF

Hon. Lawrence P. Zatkoff

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Plaintiff filed this action seeking Social Security disability benefits. This matter currently comes before the Court on the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation [dkt 22], in which the Magistrate Judge recommends that Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment [dkt 17] be denied and Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment [dkt 21] be granted. Plaintiff has filed objections to the Magistrate's Report and Recommendation [dkt 25], to which Defendant has responded [dkt 26]. The Court has thoroughly reviewed the court file, the respective motions, the Report and Recommendation, Plaintiff's objections, and Defendant's response. For the reasons discussed below, the Court ADOPTS the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation. Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED, and Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED. The Court will, however, briefly address Plaintiff's objections.

Plaintiff raises six objections to the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation. In her objections, Plaintiff essentially disputes the ALJ's weighing of the evidence, and objects to the Magistrate Judge's failure to adopt Plaintiff's views in that regard. Plaintiff further argues in her objections that there is evidence to conflict the ALJ's relied-upon evidence, and that substantial evidence exists to support a finding in Plaintiff's favor on a particular issue. Even if true, however, these claims are not dispositive if "it is also true that substantial evidence supports [Defendant's] finding." Casey v. Sec'y of Health & Human Svc's, 987 F.2d 1230, 1235 (6th Cir. 1993). The ALJ showed, and the Magistrate Judge acknowledged, that substantial evidence existed to support the ALJ's conclusions.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment [dkt 17] is DENIED, and Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment [dkt 21] is GRANTED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

______________

LAWRENCE P. ZATKOFF

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

The undersigned certifies that a copy of this Order was served upon the attorneys of record by electronic or U.S. mail on March 28, 2012.

Marie E. Verlinde

Case Manager

(810) 984-3290