DePue v. Kijakazi

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania

DePue v. Kijakazi

Trial Court Opinion

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

REBECCA DEPUE, No. 3:22-CV-01185

Plaintiff, (Chief Judge Brann)

v. (Magistrate Judge Saporito)

KILOLO KIJAKAZI, Acting Commissioner of Social Security,

Defendant.

ORDER NOVEMBER 29, 2023 Rebecca DePue filed this action seeking review of a decision of the Acting Commissioner of Social Security (“Commissioner”) denying DePue’s claim for social security disability benefits.1 In August 2023, Magistrate Judge Joseph F. Saporito, Jr. issued a Report and Recommendation recommending that this Court affirm the Commissioner’s decision.2 After receiving an extension of time, DePue filed timely objections to the Report and Recommendation.3 In her objections, DePue contends that Magistrate Judge Saporito erred in: (1) failing to properly address a doctor’s recommendation that DePue avoid balancing; (2) failing to account for the impact that an inability to

1 Docs. 1, 18. 2 Doc. 25. balance may have on DePue’s ability to perform sedentary work; and (3) concluding that the administrative law judge properly accounted for DePue’s activities of daily

living in rejecting two medical opinions.4 “If a party objects timely to a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, the district court must ‘make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made.’”5

Regardless of whether timely objections are made, district courts may accept, reject, or modify—in whole or in part—the magistrate judge’s findings or recommendations.6 Upon de novo review of the record, the Court finds no error in

Magistrate Judge Saporito’s conclusion that, as a whole, the Commissioner’s decision is supported by substantial evidence. Consequently, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Magistrate Judge Joseph F. Saporito, Jr.’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. 25) is ADOPTED; 2. The Commissioner’s decision is AFFIRMED; 3. Final Judgment is entered in favor of Defendant and against DePue

pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 58 and sentence four of

42 U.S.C. § 405

(g); and

4

Id.

5 Equal Emp’t Opportunity Comm’n v. City of Long Branch,

866 F.3d 93, 99

(3d Cir. 2017) (quoting

28 U.S.C. § 636

(b)(1)). 6

28 U.S.C. § 636

(b)(1); Local Rule 72.31. 4. The Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE this case.

BY THE COURT:

s/ Matthew W. Brann Matthew W. Brann Chief United States District Judge

Reference

Status
Unknown