Drollinger v. Astrue, No. 9:2012cv00172 - Document 25 (D. Mont. 2013)

Court Description: ORDER denying 16 Motion for Summary Judgment; granting 20 Motion for Summary Judgment; adopting Findings and Recommendations re 24 Findings and Recommendations. Signed by Chief Judge Dana L. Christensen on 11/4/2013. (dle)

Download PDF
Drollinger v. Astrue Doc. 25 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MONTANA MISSOULA DIVISION RYAN S. DROLLINGER, CV 12–172–M–DLC Plaintiff, ORDER vs. CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant. In this case, which Plaintiff Ryan Drollinger brought under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) seeking judicial review of the Commissioner of Social Security’s decision, there are two pending motions for summary judgment. Plaintiff filed his motion (Doc. 16) on June 5, 2013, and Defendant filed her motion (Doc. 20) on July 19, 2013. United States Magistrate Judge Jeremiah C. Lynch entered Findings and Recommendations on August 30, 2013. (Doc. 24.) The parties did not file objections and so have waived the right to de novo review. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). The Findings and Recommendations are instead reviewed for clear error. McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Commodore Bus. Mach., Inc., 656 F.2d 1309, 1313 (9th Cir. 1981). Clear error exists if the Court is left with a “definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed.” United States v. Syrax, 235 F.3d 1 Dockets.Justia.com 422, 427 (9th Cir. 2000). Judge Lynch recommended that: (1) Drollinger’s motion be denied; (2) the Commissioner’s motion be granted; and (3) the Commissioner’s decision be affirmed. Judge Lynch addressed the five-step sequential evaluation process that the Commissioner uses to determine whether a claimant is disabled. At the outset, Judge Lynch correctly stated that this Court’s review for a decision of the Commissioner of Social Security is limited. He concluded that the Administrative Law Judge’s decision was based on substantial evidence and free of legal error. There is no clear error in his findings or recommendations. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED: 1. Judge Lynch’s Findings and Recommendation (Doc. 24) are adopted in full. 2. Drollinger’s motion for summary judgment (Doc. 16) is DENIED and the Commissioner’s motion for summary judgment (Doc. 20) is GRANTED. 3. The Commissioner’s decision is AFFIRMED. DATED this 4th day of November, 2013. 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.