United States District Court, N.D. Ohio, Eastern Division
SUZANNE P. VARITEK, Plaintiff,
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant.
M. Parker Magistrate Judge
C. NUGENT UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
matter comes before the Court on the Report and
Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Thomas M. Parker (ECF
#17), recommending that the Commissioner of Social
Security's final determination denying Plaintiff, Suzanne
Varitek's application for Disability Insurance Benefits
and Procedural Background
February 20, 2015, Plaintiff, Suzanne Varitek, applied for
Disability Insurance Benefits (DIB) alleging a disability
onset date of July 1, 2014 due to bipolar disorder, anxiety,
ADHD, interstitial cystitis, and gastritis. (ECF #17 p. 2).
The Social Security Administration denied Ms. Varitek's
application initially and upon reconsideration.
(Id.). Upon Ms. Varitek's request for an
administrative hearing, Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) Karl
Alexander heard Ms. Varitek's case on August 23, 2017,
and denied her claim on December 26, 2017. (Id.). On
April 6, 2018, the Appeals Council denied further review,
rendering the ALJ's decision and Commissioner's
decision final. (Id.). On June 5, 2018, Ms. Varitek
filed a complaint to seek judicial review of the
Commissioner's decision. (ECF #1).
April 23, 2019. Magistrate Judge Parker issued his Report and
Recommendation. (ECF #17). Magistrate Judge Parker found the
ALJ "applied the proper legal standards and reached a
decision supported by substantial evidence." (ECF #17
pp. 32). On May 7. 2019, Plaintiff filed two objections to
the Report and Recommendation. (ECF #18). On May 21, 2019,
the Commissioner filed a Response to Plaintiffs objections.
of Review for a Magistrate Judge's Report and
standard of review for a Magistrate Judge's Report and
Recommendation is distinct from the ALJ's standard of
review for the Commissioner of Social Security's decision
in that the ALJ is limited to considering whether the
Commissioner's decision is supported by substantial
evidence. See Smith v. Secretary of Health and Human
Servs., 893 F.2d 106, 108 (6th Cir. 1989)
applicable District Court standard of review for a Magistrate
Judge's Report and Recommendation depends on whether
objections were made to the report. When objections are made
to a Report and Recommendation, the District Court reviews
the case de novo. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) provides:
The district judge must determine de novo any part of the
magistrate judge's disposition that has been properly
objected to. The district judge may accept, reject, or modify
the recommended disposition; receive further evidence; or
return the matter to the magistrate judge with instructions.
Varitek filed two objections in response to Magistrate Judge
Parker's Report and Recommendation. Ms. Varitek's
first objection alleges that the ALJ failed to account for
her gastrointestinal issues, and secondly, that the ALJ
failed to properly evaluate the opinions of the consultative
examiner. (Id. p. 2-3). Magistrate Judge
Parker"s Report and Recommendation properly reviewed the
ALJ's consideration of Ms. Varitek's gastrointestinal
issues and the opinions of the consultative examiner.
Further. Magistrate Judge Parker was correct in finding that
the ALJ adequately considered those issues in his decision to
uphold the Commissioner's denial of Ms. Varitek's
application. Magistrate Judge Parker applied the correct
standard of review in deciding that the Commissioner's
findings were reasonably drawn from the record and supported
by substantial evidence. (ECF #17 p. 17). Accordingly, this
Court agrees with Magistrate Judge Parker's conclusion
and finds Ms. Varitek's objections to be without merit.
After careful evaluation of the record, this Court adopts the
findings of fact and conclusions of Magistrate Judge
Parker's as its own.
Judge Parker thoroughly and exhaustively reviewed this case,
and properly found the ALJ's decision to be supported by
substantial evidence. Accordingly, the Report and
Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Parker (ECF #17) is hereby
ADOPTED. The Commissioner's final determine denying ...