Opinion
CASE NO. 1:06-cv-00166-MP-EMT.
February 28, 2008
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Doc. 20, the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, recommending that the decision of the Commissioner, denying benefits be affirmed. The parties have been furnished a copy of the report and recommendation and have been afforded an opportunity to file objections. The Claimant has done so at doc. 21. Pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section 636(b)(1), I have made a de novo review of those portions to which an objection has been made. Having considered the Report and Recommendation and all objections thereto timely filed, I have determined that the Report and Recommendation should be ADOPTED.
The Court agrees with the Magistrate Judge that the ALJ was entitled to reject Dr. DePaz's legal conclusion that Claimant was not "work fit" for her previous employment. Such a legal conclusion is left to the ALJ, not the physician. Additionally, the Court agrees that the medical conclusions that Dr. DePaz made provide substantial evidence supporting the ability of the Claimant to perform her past work. Second, the ALJ properly applied the Eleventh Circuit's three-part pain standard, and substantial evidence supported the ALJ's decision at each step. The Court rejects the Claimant's argument in the objections that simply because a strong pain reliever was prescribed at one point the Court must find that the pain level rendered the Claimant totally disabled. Finally, the Court agrees that the ALJ properly calculated the residual functional capacity supported by substantial evidence.
Accordingly, it is hereby
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:
1. The Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation is adopted and incorporated by reference in this order.
2. The Commissioner's decision, denying benefits, is affirmed.
DONE AND ORDERED