Rachel Rebecca Yohn v. Commissioner of Social Security

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA RACHEL REBECCA YOHN, No. 1:25-CV-00543 Plaintiff, (Chief Judge Brann) v. (Magistrate Judge Camoni) COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant.

ORDER MARCH 10, 2026 Rachel Rebecca Yohn filed this action seeking review of a decision of the Acting Commissioner of Social Security (“Commissioner”) denying Yohn’s claim for social security disability benefits.1 In January 2026, Magistrate Judge Sean A.

Camoni issued a Report and Recommendation recommending that this Court affirm the Commissioner’s decision.2 Yohn has filed timely objections to the Report and Recommendation.3 In her objections, Yohn contends that Magistrate Judge Camoni erred in recommending that the Commissioner’s decision was supported by substantial evidence, as the

1 Docs. 1, 16.

2 Doc. 20.

Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) failed to adequately explain why he rejected certain evidence.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 Camoni’s conclusion that, as a whole, the Commissioner’s decision is supported by substantial evidence. The ALJ’s explanation of his decision— particularly when accounting for his overall discussion of the evidence—was sufficient to afford meaningful judicial review. Moreover, while there is significant evidence supporting Yohn’s claim of disability, there is also sufficient evidence supporting the ALJ’s determination that she is not disabled. While the Court may have reached a different decision if presented with these facts in the first instance, it must conclude that the Commissioner’s decision is supported by substantial evidence. Consequently, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

4 Id. 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.

1. Magistrate Judge Sean A. Camoni’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. 20) is ADOPTED; 2. The Commissioner’s decision is AFFIRMED; 3. Final Judgment is entered in favor of Defendant and against Yohn pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 58 and sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g); and 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