United States District Court, W.D. Washington, Seattle
ORDER REVERSING THE COMMISSIONER'S
A. TSUCHIDA, CHIEF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
seeks review of the denial of his application for
Supplemental Security Income and Disability Insurance
Benefits. He contends the ALJ erred in discounting certain
medical opinions and discounting his own subjective
testimony. Dkt. 12. As discussed below, the Court
REVERSES the Commissioner's final
decision and REMANDS the matter for further
administrative proceedings under sentence four of 42 U.S.C.
is currently 44 years old, has a high school diploma with
additional training in computer programming and data entry,
and has worked as a fast-food cashier, hospital aide,
retail/warehouse truck driver, and hotel night auditor. Tr.
344-45. In June 2014, he protectively applied for benefits,
alleging disability as of May 9, 2014. Tr. 314-26. His
applications were denied initially and on reconsideration.
Tr. 212-18, 221-31. The ALJ conducted a hearing on December
5, 2016 (Tr. 91-122), and a supplemental hearing on July 12,
2017 (Tr. 123-31), and subsequently found Plaintiff not
disabled. Tr. 17-32. As the Appeals Council denied
Plaintiff's request for review, the ALJ's decision is
the Commissioner's final decision. Tr. 1-6.
Utilizing the five-step disability evaluation process,
Step one: Plaintiff had not engaged in
substantial gainful activity since May 9, 2014.
Step two: Plaintiff's major depressive
disorder and social anxiety disorder are severe impairments.
Step three: These impairments did not meet
or equal the requirements of a listed
RFC: Plaintiff can perform a full range of
work at all exertional levels, but has the following
additional limitations: he can understand, remember, and
apply information sufficiently to carry out tasks with a
General Education Development reasoning level of 2 or less.
He can work in a setting with no public contact and
occasional coworker contact. He can work in a routine setting
with few changes.
Step four: Plaintiff could not perform his
Step five: As there are jobs that exist in
significant numbers in the national economy that Plaintiff
can perform, he is not disabled.