govinfo:USCOURTS-flsd-0_24-cv-60578-1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 
 
CASE NO. 24-60578-CIV-COHN/GOODMAN 
 
COSSETTE CUNILLERA MUNIZ, 
 
 Plaintiff, 
 
v. 
 
CAROLYN COLVIN,  
Acting Commissioner of Social Security, 
 
 Defendant. 
 / 
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 
THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon the Omnibus Report and 
Recommendations on Summary Judgment Motions [DE 16] ("Report") submitted by 
United States Magistrate Judge Jonathan Goodman regarding the parties' cross 
motions for summary judgment [DE 10; DE 13] (collectively, the “Motions”).  The Court 
has carefully reviewed the Report, the Motions, Plaintiff's Objections [DE 17], 
Defendant’s Response to Plaintiff’s Objections [DE 18], the record in the case, and is 
otherwise fully advised in the premises. 
Because Plaintiff filed timely objections, the Court has reviewed de novo the 
portions of the Report to which Plaintiff has objected.  28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); LoConte v. 
Dugger, 847 F.2d 745, 750 (11th Cir. 1988), cert. denied 488 U.S. 958 (1988). For the 
reasons discussed below, the Court agrees with Judge Goodman’s reasoning and 
analysis that Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment should be denied and 
Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment should be granted.   
Case 0:24-cv-60578-JIC   Document 19   Entered on FLSD Docket 02/10/2025   Page 1 of 4
2 
In his Report, Judge Goodman found that the Administrative Law Judge’s ("ALJ") 
determination that Plaintiff is not disabled was supported by substantial evidence. 
DE 16 at 11. Plaintiff raises one objection to Judge Goodman’s Report—that Judge 
Goodman erred in finding that the ALJ was not required to consider the evaluation of 
psychiatrist Dr. Maxine Sadhai because it did not qualify as a medical opinion.  DE 17 at 
1-2.  The Court finds Plaintiff’s objection without merit and will adopt Judge Goodman’s 
conclusion as stated in his Report. 
The Court’s review of an ALJ’s decision is limited to “whether [the decision] is 
supported by substantial evidence and whether it is based on proper legal standards.”  
Crawford v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 363 F.3d 1155, 1158 (11th Cir. 2004).  The Eleventh 
Circuit has described this standard as follows: 
Substantial evidence is something “more than a mere scintilla, but less 
than a preponderance.” Hale v. Bowen, 831 F.2d 1007, 1011 (11th 
Cir.1987) (internal quotation and citation omitted). “If the Commissioner's 
decision is supported by substantial evidence, this Court must affirm, even 
if the proof preponderates against it.” Phillips v. Barnhart, 357 F.3d 1232, 
1240 n. 8 (11th Cir.2004). “We may not decide facts anew, reweigh the 
evidence, or substitute our judgment for that of the [Commissioner.]” 357 
F.3d at 1240 n. 8 (internal quotation and citation omitted). 
 
Dyer v. Barnhart, 395 F.3d 1206, 1210 (11th Cir. 2005). 
Pursuant to 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520c, an ALJ must consider the “claimant’s 
proffered medical opinions” when evaluating a social security claim.  Medical opinions 
are statements “from a medical source about what [the claimant] can still do despite 
[her] impairment(s) and whether [the claimant] ha[s] one or more impairment-related 
limitations or restrictions in the following abilities:” the ability to perform physical 
demands of work activities (such as sitting, standing, walking, carrying, or crouching); 
the ability to perform mental demands of work activities (such as understanding, 
Case 0:24-cv-60578-JIC   Document 19   Entered on FLSD Docket 02/10/2025   Page 2 of 4
3 
remembering, or carrying out instructions); the ability to perform other demands of work 
(such as seeing or hearing); and the ability to adapt to environmental conditions.  20 
C.F.R. § 404.1513.   
Dr. Sadhai opined that Plaintiff’s “social functioning is moderate,” and while she 
“interacts and relates well with others,” she “is limited by her depression and panic 
attacks.”  DE 9 at 816.  As Judge Goodman accurately stated, “Dr. Sadhai’s statement 
does not qualify as a medical opinion under 20 C.F.R. § 404.1513 because it failed to 
address what Plaintiff could still do or not do at work as a result of her mental health 
limitations.”  DE 16 at 10.  Plaintiff contends that Dr. Sadhai’s use of the term “others” 
indicates that Plaintiff’s panic attacks and depression limit her ability to interact with 
coworkers and supervisors.  DE 17 at 2.  However, as Judge Goodman pointed out, 
“[m]erely stating that Plaintiff ‘is limited by her depression and panic attacks’ is not 
sufficient to be a medical opinion because, without any specification, the Court is unable 
to determine the extent of Plaintiff’s limitations and whether those limitations are so 
severe that they would bar her from working entirely.”  DE 16 at 10.  As such, Dr. 
Sadhai’s statement was not a medical opinion that the ALJ was required to weigh 
because it failed to address what Plaintiff can or cannot do despite her impairments.  
See Glover v. Colvin, 705 F. App'x 815, 817-18 (11th Cir. 2017) (holding that the ALJ 
did not err in failing to weigh a doctor’s opinion that “[r]eliability is likely to be a problem 
due to mood instability and lack of motivation” because the doctor “did not express that 
opinion in terms of how it would limit [the claimant’s] ability to work.”).  Accordingly, it is 
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows: 
1. Plaintiff's Objections [DE 17] are OVERRULED; 
Case 0:24-cv-60578-JIC   Document 19   Entered on FLSD Docket 02/10/2025   Page 3 of 4
4 
2. The Report and Recommendation [DE 16] is ADOPTED; 
3. Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment [DE 10] is DENIED; 
4. Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment [DE 13] is GRANTED; 
5. The decision of the Commissioner in this case is AFFIRMED, and the Complaint 
[DE 1] in this case is DISMISSED on the merits; and 
6. The Court will enter a separate final judgment. 
DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Fort Lauderdale, Broward County, 
Florida, this 10th day of February, 2025. 
 
Copies provided to: 
Counsel of record via CM/ECF 
Case 0:24-cv-60578-JIC   Document 19   Entered on FLSD Docket 02/10/2025   Page 4 of 4

Passage view · GavelSight