Coleman v. Commissioner of Social Security, No. 1:2016cv00931 - Document 14 (N.D. Ohio 2017)
Court Description: Opinion & Order signed by Judge James S. Gwin on 3/31/17. The Court, for the reasons set forth in this order, adopts the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge and affirms the Administrative Law Judge's denial of benefits. (Related Docs. 1 and 13 ) (D,MA)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Coleman v. Commissioner of Social Security Doc. 14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO -----------------------------------------------------JEFFREY COLEMAN, Plaintiff, vs. NANCY A. BERRYHILL, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant. : : : : : : : : : : : : CASE NO. 1:16-CV-931 OPINION & ORDER [Resolving Doc. 1] -----------------------------------------------------JAMES S. GWIN, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE: Plaintiff Jeffrey Coleman brings claims for wrongful denial of Period of Disability, Disability Insurance Benefits, and Supplemental Security Income.1 On December 21, 2012, Administrative Law Judge Sara L. Alston held a hearing on Coleman’s benefits application.2 The ALJ found that Plaintiff Coleman was not disabled and denied the application.3 On March 5, 2014, the Appeals Council remanded for further proceedings because the hearing decision did not account for Coleman’s mental impairments in its Residual Functional Capacity (RFC) Assessment and failed to evaluate Coleman’s obesity. 4 On June 6, 2014, Administrative Law Judge Penny Loucas held a second hearing.5 The ALJ found that Plaintiff Coleman was not disabled and denied the application.6 The ALJ’s decision became final on February 19, 2016, when the Appeals Council declined further review.7 1 Doc. 1. Doc. 9 at 49-109. 3 Id. at 172. 4 Id. at 191-94. 5 Id. at 21-48. 6 Id. at 195-212. 7 Id. at 5-9. 2 Dockets.Justia.com Case No. 1:16-cv-931 Gwin, J. On February 17, 2017, Magistrate Judge Jonathan D. Greenberg issued a Report and Recommendation recommending that this Court affirm the Administrative Law Judge’s denial of benefits.8 The parties have failed to file objections by the deadline, March 3, 2017. The Federal Magistrates Act requires a district court to conduct a de novo review only of those portions of a Report and Recommendation to which the parties have made an objection.9 Absent objection, a district court may adopt the Magistrate Judge’s report without review.10 Moreover, having conducted its own review of the complaint and administrative record, the Court agrees with the conclusions of the Magistrate Judge. Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Greenberg’s findings of fact and conclusions of law and incorporates them fully herein by reference. This Court ADOPTS the recommendation of the Magistrate Judge and AFFIRMS the ALJ’s denial of benefits. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: March 31, 2017 s/ James S. Gwin JAMES S. GWIN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 8 Doc. 13 at 1. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). 10 Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985). 9 -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.
