Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-alnd-6_09-cv-00946/USCOURTS-alnd-6_09-cv-00946-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 863
Nature of Suit: Social Security - DIWC/DIWW (405(g))
Cause of Action: 42:405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)

---

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

JASPER DIVISION

Ted Hawkins,

Plaintiff,

v.

MICHAEL J. ASTRUE,

Commissioner of Social Security,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CIVIL ACTION NO. 09-G-0946-J

MEMORANDUM OPINION

The plaintiff, Ted Hawkins, brings this action seeking judicial review of a

final adverse decision of the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration (the

Commissioner) denying his application for Social Security Benefits. Ted Hawkins filed

an application for Social Security Benefits. Thereafter, plaintiff timely pursued and

exhausted the administrative remedies available before the Commissioner. Accordingly,

this case is now ripe for judicial review pursuant to the provisions of section 205(g) of

the Social Security Act (the Act), 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).

Plaintiff filed a motion to remand, which is due to be denied. The “new

evidence” referred to by the motion was in fact submitted to the Appeals Council. Under

the law of this Circuit, such evidence is to be considered by the district court in it’s

review of the ALJ’s decision. Ingram v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec. Admin., 496 F.3d 1253

FILED

 2010 Jan-15 AM 10:07

U.S. DISTRICT COURT

N.D. OF ALABAMA

Case 6:09-cv-00946-JFG Document 12 Filed 01/15/10 Page 1 of 2
2

(11 Cir. 2007). Accordingly, the court has considered that evidence in it’s determination th

of whether substantial evidence supports the ALJ’s decision.

The sole function of this court is to determine whether the decision of the

Commissioner is supported by substantial evidence and whether proper legal standards

were applied. Bloodsworth v. Heckler, 703 F.2d 1233, 1239 (11th Cir. 1983). To that

end this court “must scrutinize the record as a whole to determine if the decision reached

is reasonable and supported by substantial evidence.” Bloodsworth, at 1239 (citations

omitted). Substantial evidence is “such relevant evidence as a reasonable person would

accept as adequate to support a conclusion.” Bloodsworth, at 1239. The court has

carefully reviewed the entire record in this case and is of the opinion that the

Commissioner's decision is supported by substantial evidence and that proper legal

standards were applied in reaching that decision. Accordingly, the decision of the

Commissioner must be affirmed.

A separate order in conformity with this memorandum opinion will be

entered.

DONE and ORDERED 14 January 2010.

 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

J. FOY GUIN, JR.

Case 6:09-cv-00946-JFG Document 12 Filed 01/15/10 Page 2 of 2