United States District Court, W.D. Washington, Seattle
MICHELLE L. PETERSON, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.
seeks review of the denial of his application for
Supplemental Security Income and Disability Insurance
Benefits. Plaintiff contends the administrative law judge
(“ALJ”) erred in evaluating Plaintiff's
symptom testimony. (Dkt. # 9 at 1.) As discussed below, the
Court AFFIRMS the Commissioner's final decision and
DISMISSES the case with prejudice.
was born in 1975, has a GED, and has worked as an assistant
restaurant manager, as a petty officer in the Navy, as a
groundskeeper, and in security. AR at 38, 184, 202, 215.
Plaintiff was last gainfully employed in 2008. Id.
September 18, 2017, Plaintiff applied for benefits, alleging
disability as of October 29, 2010. AR at 35. Plaintiff's
applications were denied initially and on reconsideration,
and Plaintiff requested a hearing. Id. at 67, 75,
98-99. After the ALJ conducted a hearing on May 10, 2018, the
ALJ issued a decision finding Plaintiff not disabled.
Id. at 14-31.
the five-step disability evaluation process,  the ALJ found:
Step one: Plaintiff has not engaged in substantial gainful
activity during the period from his amended alleged onset
date of October 29, 2010 through his date last insured of
September 30, 2013.
Step two: Plaintiff has the following severe impairments:
bipolar disorder and diabetes mellitus.
Step three: These impairments do not meet or equal the
requirements of a listed impairment.
Residual Functional Capacity: Plaintiff can perform medium
work as defined in 20 CFR 404.1567(c) except that the work is
limited to a work environment free of fast-paced production
requirements with only occasional, superficial interaction
with the public and coworkers.
Step four: Plaintiff can perform past relevant work as a
groundskeeper, industrial commercial.
Step five: In the alternative, as there are other jobs that
exist in significant numbers in the national economy that
Plaintiff can ...