IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

DEBORAH L. STOVER, : CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:17-CV-1962 : Plaintiff : (Chief Judge Conner) : v. : : ANDREW M. SAUL, : Commissioner of Social Security, : : Defendant :

ORDER

AND NOW, this 23rd day of March, 2020, upon consideration of the report (Doc. 22) of Magistrate Judge Joseph F. Saporito, Jr., recommending that the court deny the appeal of plaintiff Deborah L. Stover from the decision of the administrative law judge (“ALJ”) denying her application for disability insurance benefits, and the court noting that Stover filed objections (Doc. 23) to the report, see FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b), and the Commissioner of Social Security filed a response (Doc. 25) thereto, and following de novo review of the contested portions of the report, see E.E.O.C. v. City of Long Branch,

(3d Cir. 2017) (quoting

(b)(1)), and affording “reasoned consideration” to the uncontested portions, see

(quoting Henderson v. Carlson,

(3d Cir. 1987)), the court agreeing with Judge Saporito that the ALJ did not err in evaluating Stover’s testimony as to the extent of her symptoms, nor did he err in evaluating the reports of Stover’s husband and Stover’s former supervisor, and further agreeing that the ALJ’s explanation for assigning limited weight to the opinion of Stover’s treating psychologist, while less than rigorous, is adequate, in that the ALJ fully canvassed Stover’s treatment records, (see Tr. at 100-04), before concluding that the opinion of total functional disability offered by Stover’s treating psychologist is “inconsistent” with and thus unsupported by those underlying records, which document generally

normal mental status examinations and minimal mood symptoms, (see id. at 104; see also id. at 100-04; Doc. 22 at 25-26), and the court thus being prepared to adopt Judge Saporito’s conclusion that the ALJ’s decision “is supported by substantial evidence,”

(g), a standard of review that the Supreme Court of the United States recently reiterated “is not high,” Biestek v. Berryhill,

,

(2019), finding the report’s analysis to be thorough, well-reasoned, and fully supported by the record, and finding Stover’s objections to be without merit and

squarely and correctly addressed by the report, it is hereby ORDERED that: 1. The report (Doc. 22) of Magistrate Judge Saporito is ADOPTED.

2. The decision of the Commissioner denying Stover’s application for disability insurance benefits is AFFIRMED.

3. The Clerk of Court shall enter judgment in favor of the Commissioner and against Stover as set forth in paragraph 2.

4. The Clerk of Court shall thereafter CLOSE this case.

/S/ CHRISTOPHER C. CONNER Christopher C. Conner, Chief Judge United States District Court Middle District of Pennsylvania