Treadway v. Commissioner of Social Security

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION ELIZABETH TREADWAY, ) CASENO. 1:25 CV 1744 ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) JUDGE DONALD C. NUGENT ) COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL ) SECURITY, ) Magistrate Judge ) Jennifer Dowdell Armstrong ) Defendant. ) MEMORANDUM OPINION This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Jennifer Dowdell Armstrong (Docket #12) recommending that the Commissioner of Social Security’s final determination denying Plaintiff, Elizabeth Treadway’s Application for Supplemental Security Income be affirmed.’ On June 24, 2026, Plaintiff filed Objections to the Report and Recommendation. (Docket #13.) On June 29, 2026, the Commissioner of Social Security filed a Response to Plaintiff's Objections. (Docket #14.) The factual and procedural history of this case, including the ALJ’s findings and conclusions, is set forth in the Report and Recommendation at pages 1-26. Standard of Review for a Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation The applicable district court standard of review for a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation depends upon whether objections were made to the report. When objections are made to a report and recommendation of a magistrate judge, the district court reviews the case de novo. FED. R. CIv. P. 72(b) provides: The district judge must determine de novo any part of the magistrate judge’s disposition that has been properly objected to. The district judge may accept, reject, or modify the recommended disposition; receive further evidence; or return the matter to the magistrate judge with instructions. The standard of review for a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation is distinct from the standard of review for the Commissioner of Social Security’s decision regarding benefits. Judicial review of the Commissioner’s decision, as reflected in the decisions of the ALJ, is limited to whether the decision is supported by substantial evidence. See Smith v. Secretary of Health and Human Servs., 893 F.2d 106, 108 (6" Cir. 1989). “Substantial evidence exists when a reasonable mind could accept the evidence as adequate to support the challenged conclusion, even if that evidence could support a decision the other way.” Casey v. Secretary of Health and Human Servs., 987 F.2d 1230, 1233 (6" Cir. 1993) (citation omitted). Conclusion This Court has reviewed the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation de novo and has considered the pleadings, transcripts, and filings of the Parties, as well as the Objections to the Report and Recommendation filed by Plaintiff and the Commissioner’s Response thereto. After careful evaluation of the Record, the Court adopts the findings of fact and conclusions of law of the Magistrate Judge as its own. Magistrate Judge Armstrong carefully and exhaustively reviewed this case, addressing both of the Assignments of Error raised by Plaintiff, applied the -2- applicable law and correctly determined that the ALJ’s decision is supported by substantial evidence. In her Objections, Plaintiff challenges the Magistrate Judge’s analysis of ALJ’s determination regarding her alleged fibromyalgia. However, the Magistrate Judge thoroughly addressed this issue in her Report and Recommendation and, for the reasons stated therein, properly concluded that the ALJ adequately considered whether to include limitations attributable to Plaintiff's alleged fibromyalgia when developing the RFC and that the ALJ’s decision not to include any such limitations is supported by substantial evidence. (Report and Recommendation at pp. 29-38.) Accordingly, Plaintiff's Objections are not well taken. The Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Jennifer Dowdell Armstrong (Docket #12) is hereby ADOPTED. The Commissioner of Social Security’s final determination denying Plaintiff, Elizabeth Treadway’s Application for Supplemental Security Income is hereby AFFIRMED. This case is hereby TERMINATED. IT IS SO ORDERED. Hvac all toga United States District Jud DATED: el | _ 20 LL “3