Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Brian F. v. Commissioner of Social Security

United States District Court, W.D. Washington, Tacoma

May 23, 2019

BRIAN F., Plaintiff,
v.
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant.

          ORDER AFFIRMING DEFENDANT'S DECISION TO DENY BENEFITS

          THERESA L. FRICKE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

         Brian F. has brought this matter for judicial review of defendant's denial of his applications for disability insurance and supplemental security income (SSI) benefits. The parties have consented to have this matter heard by the undersigned Magistrate Judge. 28 U.S.C. § 636(c); Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 73; Local Rule MJR 13. For the reasons below, the undersigned affirms defendant's decision to deny benefits.

         PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

         Plaintiff filed applications for disability insurance benefits and SSI in October 2015, alleging he became disabled as of April 15, 2015. Dkt. 9, Administrative Record (AR) 15. Both applications were denied at the initial and reconsideration levels of administrative review. Id. After a hearing, an administrative law judge (ALJ) issued an unfavorable written decision on May 1, 2017. Id.; AR 29-85 (hearing transcript). The ALJ performed the five-step sequential analysis. AR 15-28. He determined that there were jobs existing in significant numbers in the national economy that plaintiff could perform, and therefore that plaintiff was not disabled. AR 27. Plaintiff filed a complaint with this Court, seeking reversal and remand for a new hearing or an award of benefits.

         STANDARD OF REVIEW

         The Court will uphold an ALJ's decision unless: (1) the decision is based on legal error; or (2) the decision is not supported by substantial evidence. Revels v. Berryhill, 874 F.3d 648, 654 (9th Cir. 2017). Substantial evidence is “‘such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion.'” Biestek v. Berryhill, 139 S.Ct. 1148, 1154 (2019) (quoting Consolidated Edison Co. v. NLRB, 305 U.S. 197, 229 (1938)). This requires “more than a mere scintilla, ” though “less than a preponderance” of the evidence. Id.; Trevizo v. Berryhill, 871 F.3d 664, 674-75 (9th Cir. 2017).

         The Court must consider the administrative record as a whole. Garrison v. Colvin, 759 F.3d 995, 1009 (9th Cir. 2014). The Court is required to weigh both the evidence that supports, and evidence that does not support, the ALJ's conclusion. Id. The Court may not affirm the decision of the ALJ for a reason upon which the ALJ did not rely. Id. Only the reasons identified by the ALJ are considered in the scope of the Court's review. Id.

         “If the evidence admits of more than one rational interpretation, ” that decision must be upheld. Allen v. Heckler, 749 F.2d 577, 579 (9th Cir. 1984). That is, “‘[w]here there is conflicting evidence sufficient to support either outcome, '” the Court “‘must affirm the decision actually made.'” Id. (quoting Rhinehart v. Finch, 438 F.2d 920, 921 (9th Cir. 1971)).

         ISSUES FOR REVEW

1. Did the ALJ err in determining that plaintiff's mental-health conditions did not meet the criteria for a listed impairment?
2. Did the ALJ err in failing to include manipulative limitations in plaintiff's residual functional capacity?
3. Did the ALJ provide adequate reasons to discount plaintiff's testimony?

         DISCUSSION

         The Commissioner uses a five-step sequential evaluation process to determine whether a claimant is disabled. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520, 416.920. At step four of that process, the claimant's residual functional capacity (RFC) is assessed to determine whether past relevant work can be performed, and, if necessary, at step five to determine whether an adjustment to other work can be made. Kennedy v. Colvin, 738 F.3d 1172, 1175 (9th Cir. 2013). At step five, the Commissioner has the burden of proof, which can be met by showing a significant number of ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.