UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

STELLA PAWLOSKI,

Plaintiff, Civil No. 08-13980

v. District Judge Denise Page Hood

Magistrate Judge R. Steven Whalen

COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL

SECURITY 

Defendant.

________________________________/

ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

This matter is before the Court on Magistrate Judge R. Steven Whalen’s Report and

Recommendation filed August 28, 2009. To date, no Objections have been filed to the Report

and Recommendation.

Judicial review of the Commissioner’s decision is limited in scope to determining

whether the findings of fact made by the Commissioner are supported by substantial evidence,

and deciding whether the Commissioner employed the proper legal criteria in reaching his

conclusion. Garner v. Heckler, 745 F.2d 383 (6th Cir. 1984). The credibility findings of an

administrative law judge (“ALJ”) must not be discarded lightly and should be accorded great

deference. Hardaway v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, 823 F.2d 922, 928 (6th Cir.

1987). A district court’s review of an ALJ’s decision is not a de novo review. The district court

may not resolve conflicts in the evidence nor decide questions of credibility. Garner, 745 F.2d

at 397. The decision of the Commissioner must be upheld if supported by substantial evidence,

even if the record might support a contrary decision. Smith v. Secretary of HHS, 893 F.2d 106,

2:08-cv-13980-DPH-RSW Doc # 15 Filed 09/18/09 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 843
2

108 (6th Cir. 1989). An administrative decision must be affirmed if supported by substantial

evidence, even if the Court might arrive at a different conclusion. Mullen v. Bowen, 800 F.2d

535, 545 (6th Cir. 1986) (quoting Baker v. Heckler, 730 F.2d 1147, 1150 (8th Cir. 1984)).

The Court has had an opportunity to review this matter and finds that the Magistrate

Judge reached the correct conclusion for the proper reasons. The Court agrees with the

Magistrate Judge that on the facts of this case, the ALJ’s hypothetical question was not flawed

because the ALJ’s findings reasonably accommodated all restrictions and limitations

substantiated by the evidence. Further, the Court agrees with the Magistrate Judge that the

ALJ’s findings are supported by the opinions of Plaintiff’s treating physicians and the record

submitted by the parties. Thus, the ALJ’s findings should not be disturbed by this Court.

Accordingly, 

IT IS ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge R. Steven

Whalen (Docket No. 14, filed August 28, 2009) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED as this Court’s

findings of fact and conclusions of law.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgement (Docket

No. 10, filed February 9, 2009) is DENIED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgement (Docket

No. 13, filed April 8, 2009) is GRANTED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this matter is DISMISSED with prejudice.

S/Denise Page Hood 

Denise Page Hood

Dated: September 18, 2009 United States District Judge

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon counsel of record

on September 18, 2009, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.

S/William F. Lewis 

Case Manager

2:08-cv-13980-DPH-RSW Doc # 15 Filed 09/18/09 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 844