Brauninger v. Commissioner of Social Security, No. 1:2016cv00926 - Document 16 (S.D. Ohio 2018)

Court Description: DECISION AND ENTRY ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE (Doc. 13 ), OVERRULING PLAINTIFF'S OBJECTIONS (Doc. 14 ), AND TERMINATING THIS CASE IN THIS COURT. Signed by Judge Timothy S. Black on 3/22/18. (jlm)

Download PDF
Brauninger v. Commissioner of Social Security Doc. 16 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION LISA BRAUNINGER, Plaintiff, vs. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECUARITY, Defendant. : : : : : : : : : : Case No. 1:16-cv-926 Judge Timothy S. Black Magistrate Judge Stephanie K. Bowman DECISION AND ENTRY ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE (Doc. 13), OVERRULING PLAINTIFF’S OBJECTIONS (Doc. 14), AND TERMINATING THIS CASE IN THIS COURT This case is before the Court pursuant to the Order of General Reference to United States Magistrate Judge Stephanie K. Bowman. Pursuant to such reference, the Magistrate Judge reviewed the pleadings filed with this Court, and, on November 3, 2017, submitted a Report and Recommendation. (Doc. 13). Plaintiff timely filed objections. (“Objections,” Doc. 14). 1 Defendant filed a response to the Objections. (Doc. 15). 1 Plaintiff’s Objections are not well-taken. First, the Objections restate Plaintiff’s argument that the Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) erred in determining that Plaintiff’s low back condition did not meet or equal the requirements of Listing 1.04(A). (Doc. 14 at 2-6). The Court agrees with the Magistrate Judge that the ALJ’s determination that Plaintiff does not have an impairment that meets or equals Listing 1.04(A) is supported by substantial evidence. (See Doc. 13 at 6-15). Second, the Objections restate Plaintiff’s argument that the ALJ improperly weighed evidence in formulating Plaintiff’s residual functioning capacity. (Doc. 14 at 6-9). The Court agrees with the Magistrate Judge that the ALJ properly determined that the testimony of Plaintiff’s treating physicians that Plaintiff would need to lie down periodically during the day was not “well supported” by the record, and accordingly, the ALJ did not err in refusing to give such testimony controlling weight. (Doc. 14 at 16-24; see also Doc. 8-1 at 28-36). Dockets.Justia.com As required by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), the Court has reviewed the comprehensive findings of the Magistrate Judge and considered de novo all of the filings in this matter. Upon consideration of the foregoing, the Court does determine that such Report and Recommendation should be and is hereby adopted in its entirety. Accordingly: 1. The Report and Recommendation (Doc 13) is ADOPTED; 2. Plaintiff’s Objection (Doc. 14) is OVERRULED; 3. The Commissioner’s decision is AFFIRMED; and 4. The Clerk shall enter judgment accordingly, whereupon this case is TERMINATED on the docket of this Court. IT IS SO ORDERED. Date: 3/22/18 Timothy S. Black United States District Judge 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.