Hunter v. Barnhart

Full title: GEORGIA B. HUNTER, Plaintiff v. JO ANNE B. BARNHART, Commissioner of…

Court: United States District Court, D. Kansas

Date published: Mar 4, 2004

Case No. 01-2451-JAR (D. Kan. Mar. 4, 2004)

Opinion

Case No. 01-2451-JAR

March 4, 2004

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ADOPTING RECOMMENDATION AND REPORT

JULIE ROBINSON, District Judge

The Commissioner of Social Security denied Plaintiff's application for disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income under §§ 223 and 1614(a)(3)(A) of the Social Security Act. Plaintiff sought review of the Administrative Law Judge's ("ALJ") decision and the Honorable John Thomas Reid issued a Recommendation and Report (Doc. 16) on September 30, 2003, which recommended the Commissioner's decision be affirmed. This matter is currently before the Court upon Plaintiff's Objections to the Recommendation and Report (Doc. 17) and Defendant's Response to Plaintiff's Objections (Doc. 18).

The standards the Court must employ when reviewing objections to a recommendation and report are clear.¹ Only those portions of a recommendation and report identified as objectionable will be reviewed.² The review of those identified portions is de novo and the Court must "consider relevant evidence of record and not merely review the magistrate judge's recommendation."³

1 See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); Fed.R.Civ.P. 72.

2 See Garcia v. City of Albuquerque, 232 F.3d 760, 767 (10th Cir. 2000); Gettings v. McKune, 88 F. Supp.2d 1205, 1211 (D. Kan. 2000).

3 See Griego v. Padilla, 64 F.3d 580, 584 (10th Cir. 1995) (citation omitted).

Plaintiff objects to portions of the Recommendation and Report upholding the ALJ's credibility findings and the ALJ's conclusion that Plaintiff has a residual functional capacity of limited light work. Defendant responds by urging the court to adopt the Recommendation and Report. The Court has conducted a de novo review, considering the relevant evidence of record, and agrees with the Magistrate Judge's finding that the ALJ's credibility and residual functional capacity determinations should be affirmed. Plaintiffs objections are denied and the Court accepts the September 30, 2003 Recommendation and Report and adopts it as its own.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiffs Objections to the Recommendation and Report of U.S. Magistrate Judge (Doc. 17) shall be denied.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the September 30, 2003 Recommendation and Report (Doc. 16) shall be adopted by the Court as its own.

IT IS SO ORDERED.