UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY PADUCAH DIVISION DANIELLE T. PLAINTIFF v. No. 5:24-cv-52-BJB COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY DEFENDANT

ORDER Danielle T. filed a complaint in March 2024 seeking judicial review of an Administrative Law Judge’s denial of her claim for disability benefits. Complaint (DN 1); see

(g) (giving courts the “power to enter ... a judgment affirming, modifying, or reversing the decision of the Commissioner’). According to Danielle T., “substantial evidence” does not support the Commissioner's finding regarding the amount of work she is capable of doing despite her limitations. See Rogers v. Commissioner of Social Security,

(6th Cir. 2007); see also

(a)(1) (defining “residual functional capacity”). She also seeks to remand the case based on new evidence. See Plaintiff's Memorandum (DN 13) at 10. The Court referred the case to Magistrate Judge King for a Report and Recommendation. DN 8. Judge King recommended the Court affirm the Commissioner’s decision. Report and Recommendation (DN 18) at 1. Substantial evidence, he concluded, supported the ALJ’s decision regarding the petitioner’s ability to work. Jd. at 7. He also explained that an after-acquired statement from her counselor regarding her mental-health limitations didn’t create a “reasonable probability that [the ALJ] would have reached a different disposition” even if she had considered this evidence. Jd. at 15-16. No party has objected to the Report and Recommendation. So the law allows this Court to adopt it without review. See Thomas v. Arn,

(1985). Nevertheless, the Court has reviewed and finds no error in Judge King’s conclusions. Accordingly, the Court adopts the Report and Recommendation, incorporates it by reference as part of this order, affirms the Commissioner’s final decision, and dismisses Danielle T.’s complaint.