Case Name in Social Security Case - Unavailable

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
RACHEL REBECCA YOHN,
Plaintiff,
v.
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL
SECURITY,
Defendant.
No. 1:25-CV-00543
(Chief Judge Brann)
(Magistrate Judge Camoni)
ORDER
M ARCH 10, 2026
Rachel Rebecca Yohn filed this action seeking review of a decision of the
Acting Commissioner of Social Security (“Commissioner”) denying Yohn’s claim
for social security disability benefits.1 In January 2026, Magistrate Judge Sean A.
Camoni issued a Report and Recommendation recommending that this Court affirm
the Commissioner’s decision.2
Yohn has filed timely objections to the Report and Recommendation.3 In her
objections, Yohn contends that Magistrate Judge Camoni erred in recommending
that the Commissioner’s decision was supported by substantial evidence, as the
1 	Docs. 1, 16.
2 	Doc. 20.
3 	Doc. 21.
Case 1:25-cv-00543-MWB Document 22 Filed 03/10/26 Page 1 of 3

2
Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) failed to adequately explain why he rejected
certain evidence. 4
“If a party objects timely to a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation,
the district court must ‘make a de novo determination of those portions of the report
or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made.’” 5
Regardless of whether timely objections are made, district courts may accept, reject,
or 	modify—in 	whole 	or 	in 	part—the 	magistrate 	judge’s 	findings 	or
recommendations.6
Upon de novo review of the record, the Court finds no error in Magistrate
Judge Camoni’s conclusion that, as a whole, the Commissioner’s decision is
supported 	by 	substantial 	evidence. 	The 	ALJ’s 	explanation 	of 	his 	decision—
particularly when accounting for his overall discussion of the evidence—was
sufficient to afford meaningful judicial review. Moreover, while there is significant
evidence supporting Yohn’s claim of disability, there is also sufficient evidence
supporting the ALJ’s determination that she is not disabled. While the Court may
have reached a different decision if presented with these facts in the first instance, it
must conclude that the Commissioner’s decision is supported by substantial
evidence. Consequently, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
4 	Id.
5 	Equal Emp’t Opportunity Comm’n v. City of Long Branch, 866 F.3d 93, 99 (3d Cir. 2017)
(quoting 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)).
6 	28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Local Rule 72.31.
Case 1:25-cv-00543-MWB Document 22 Filed 03/10/26 Page 2 of 3

3
1. 	Magistrate Judge Sean A. Camoni’s Report and Recommendation
(Doc. 20) is ADOPTED;
2. 	The Commissioner’s decision is AFFIRMED;
3. 	Final Judgment is entered in favor of Defendant and against Yohn
pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 58 and sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g);
and
4. 	The Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE this case.
BY THE COURT:
s/ Matthew W. Brann
Matthew W. Brann
Chief United States District Judge
Case 1:25-cv-00543-MWB Document 22 Filed 03/10/26 Page 3 of 3