United States District Court, W.D. Washington, Seattle
ORDER REVERSING THE COMMISSIONER'S FINAL DECISION
AND REMANDING FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS
A. TSUCHIDA CHIEF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
appeals the ALJ's decision finding him not disabled. He
contends the ALJ erred in discounting the opinions of
examining psychologist Kimberly Wheeler, Ph.D., and his
testimony. Dkt. 12 at 1. For the reasons below, the
Court REVERSES the Commissioner's final
decision and REMANDS the case with for
further administrative proceedings under sentence four of 42
U.S.C. § 405(g).
is currently 45 years old, has a GED and some college
coursework, and has worked as a temporary construction
laborer; restaurant server, training manager, and supervisor;
taxi driver; motor club customer service
representative/dispatcher; and tow-truck driver. Tr. 139,
482, 506. In June 2015, he applied for benefits, alleging
disability as of July 1, 2013. Tr. 426-32, 443-48. His
applications were denied initially and on reconsideration.
Tr. 281-88, 291-95. The ALJ held a hearing on October 31,
2017, Tr. 131-94, and subsequently issued a decision finding
Plaintiff not disabled. Tr. 19-38. As the Appeals Council
denied Plaintiff's request for review, the ALJ's
decision is the Commissioner's final decision. Tr. 1-6.
the five-step disability evaluation process,  the ALJ found:
Step one: Plaintiff has not engaged in
substantial gainful activity since the alleged onset date.
Step two: Plaintiff's bipolar disorder,
posttraumatic stress disorder, obsessive compulsive disorder,
and generalized anxiety disorder are severe impairments.
Step three: These impairments did not meet
or equal the requirements of a listed
Residual Functional Capacity: Plaintiff can
perform a full range of work at all exertional levels, with
the following limitations: he can understand, remember, and
apply short, simple instructions and perform routine,
predictable tasks, in a workplace that is not a fast-paced
production-type environment. He can make simple decisions in
work that involves exposure to few workplace changes. He
cannot interact with the general public and can have no more
than occasional interaction with co-workers and supervisors.
Step four: Plaintiff cannot perform his past
Step five: As there are jobs that exist in
significant numbers in the national economy that Plaintiff
can perform, he is not disabled.