Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-alnd-5_05-cv-01961/USCOURTS-alnd-5_05-cv-01961-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Commissioner of Social Security
Defendant
Barry L. Thompson
Plaintiff

Document Text:

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHEASTERN DIVISION

BARRY L. THOMPSON,

Plaintiff,

v.

MICHAEL J. ASTRUE,

Commissioner of Social Security,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CIVIL ACTION NO. 05-G-1961-NE

MEMORANDUM OPINION

The plaintiff, Barry L. Thompson, 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. The plaintiff

filed an application for Social Security Benefits on September 25, 2000. 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).

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

FILED

 2010 Mar-11 AM 09:25

U.S. DISTRICT COURT

N.D. OF ALABAMA

Case 5:05-cv-01961-JFG Document 20 Filed 03/11/10 Page 1 of 2
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 10 March 2010.

 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

J. FOY GUIN, JR.

Case 5:05-cv-01961-JFG Document 20 Filed 03/11/10 Page 2 of 2