Bowman v. Commissioner of Social Security, No. 2:2008cv00702 - Document 19 (S.D. Ohio 2009)

Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS, DENYING Objections, the decision of the Commissioner is REVERSED and this matter is REMANDED for further consideration of the medical evidence of record. Clerk shall enter Final Judgment pursuant to Sentence 4, 42 U.S.C. Section 405(g). Signed by Judge Algenon L. Marbley on 09/24/2009. (cw)

Download PDF
Bowman v. Commissioner of Social Security Doc. 19 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION RONDA BOWMAN, Plaintiff, vs. Civil Action 2:08-CV-702 Judge Marbley Magistrate Judge King COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant. OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiff in this action challenges the denial of her applications for disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income. In a Report and Recommendation issued on August 21, 2009, the United States Magistrate Judge found that the administrative law judge’s reliance upon the residual functional capacity assessments of the state agency physicians was misplaced because significant medical evidence, including pulmonary studies, had been generated and made part of the record after those assessments were made. Although the administrative law judge recognized that evidence was admitted after those assessments, the administrative law judge found that the new medical evidence “did not provide any credible or objectively supported new and material information that would alter the [state agency’s] findings considering the claimant’s physical limitations. ... [T]he [state agency] physician did take into consideration complaints of asthma and there is no evidence of new objective findings on physical examination.” Report and Recommendation, p.6, citing A.R. 22. The Magistrate Judge therefore recommended that the decision of the Commissioner be reversed and that the action be remanded for further consideration of the medical evidence. Id. This matter is now before the Court on the Commissioner’s Dockets.Justia.com Objections, Doc. No. 18, to that Report and Recommendation, which the Court will consider de novo. 28 U.S.C. §636(b); F.R. Civ. P. 72(b). The Commissioner argues that the Report and Recommendation failed to adequately credit the administrative law judge’s consideration and assessment of the medical evidence. To the extent that the administrative law judge considered the new medical evidence and the effects of that evidence on plaintiff’s ability to engage in work-related activities, the Court concludes that the administrative law judge substituted her “own medical judgment for that of the physician. ...” See Meece v. Barnhart, 192 F. App’x 456, 465 (6th Cir. 2006); see also Rohan v. Chater, 98 F.3d 966, 970 (7th Cir. 1996)(“ALJs must not succumb to the temptation to play doctor and make their own independent medical findings”). The Commissioner also contends that, even if the administrative law judge’s residual functional capacity assessment was not sufficiently restrictive, the claimant could, surely, nevertheless return to her past sedentary work. Objections, p.4. This Court declines to engage in such fact-finding; the determination of this and other issues relating to a claimant’s disability is properly left to the Commissioner upon the proper consideration of all of the medical evidence in the case. Accordingly, the Court concludes that the Objections are without merit and they are therefore DENIED. Recommendation is hereby ADOPTED and AFFIRMED. The Report and The decision of the Commissioner is REVERSED and this matter is hereby REMANDED for further consideration of the medical evidence of record. 2 The Clerk shall ENTER FINAL JUDGMENT pursuant to Sentence 4, 42 U.S.C. §405(g). s/Algenon L. Marbley Algenon L. Marbley United States District Judge 3

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.