Roslundv.Comm'r of Soc. Sec.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISIONSep 30, 2012
Case No. 11-12240 (E.D. Mich. Sep. 30, 2012)

Case No. 11-12240

09-30-2012

MICHAEL LEE ROSLUND, Plaintiff, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant.


Honorable Denise Page Hood


ORDER ACCEPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION, DENYING

PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND GRANTING

DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

Now before the Court is Magistrate Judge Michael Hluchaniuk's Report and Recommendation [Docket No. 12, filed August 10, 2012] on Plaintiff and Commissioner's cross motions for summary judgment. 28 U.S.C. § 636 governs the standard of review when examining a report and recommendation. This Court "shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). This Court "may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge." Id.

Plaintiff argues that the administrative law judge (ALJ) did not properly evaluate his moderate limitation in concentration, persistence, and pace in the hypothetical question posed to the vocation expert. The ALJ limited Plaintiff to "simple, routine and repetitive work activities performed in a stable work environment" and to no work "with the general public." The ALJ considered all opinions as a whole instead of only relying on certain parts of the Psychiatric Review Technique form (PRTF). The ALJ accounted for the limitations identified in the PRTF and actually limited Plaintiff more than outlined in the PRTF. The Magistrate Judge found that the hypothetical question was supported by substantial evidence. The Magistrate Judge recommends the Court affirm the ALJ's decision, deny Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment, and grant the Commissioner's motion for summary judgment. There was no objection to the Magistrate Judge's finding of fact or conclusions of law. For the reasons stated in the Magistrate Judge's August 10, 2012 Report and Recommendation, the Court accepts and adopts the Magistrate Judge's recommendation in its entirety.

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge Michael Hluchaniuk's Report and Recommendation [Docket No. 12, filed August 10, 2012] is ACCEPTED as this Court's findings of fact and conclusions of law.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Commissioner's Motion for Summary Judgment [Docket No. 10, filed December 14, 2011] is GRANTED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment [Docket No. 7, filed October 14, 2011] is DENIED.

______________


Denise Page Hood


United States District Judge


I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon counsel of record on September 30, 2012, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.

LaShawn R. Saulsberry


Case Manager