United States District Court, Western District of Virginia, Danville Division
SANDRA F. REYNOLDS, Plaintiff,
SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, Defendant.
HON. JACKSON L. KISER, JUDGE
Before me is the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge recommending that I enter an Order granting the Commissioner’s Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF No. 15], denying Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF No. 14] and dismissing this case. This Report was filed on April 1, 2015, from which date the parties had fourteen (14) days to file objections. Plaintiff, who is proceeding pro se, filed an objection wherein she contended that the Vocational Expert (“VE”) testified that she “would not be able to perform the jobs that [he] told [the ALJ] about . . . not would [Plaintiff] be able to perform any jobs in the economy today.” (Pl.’s Obj., Apr. 20, 2015 [ECF No. 20].) While that is an accurate representation of part of the VE’s testimony (see R. 42), it is not the operative part of the VE’s testimony. Rather, when the ALJ presented the VE with a hypothetical that mirrored the ALJ’s determination of Plaintiff’s residual functional capacity, he testified that there were sedentary jobs in the national economy that Plaintiff could perform. (See R. 39–41.) As such, the VE’s testimony does support the ALJ’s decision, and Plaintiff’s objection is OVERRULED.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED that the Report and Recommendation shall be, and hereby is, ADOPTED in its entirety. The Commissioner’s Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED, Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED, and this case is hereby DISMISSED. The ...