United States District Court, W.D. Washington, Tacoma
ORDER AFFIRMING THE COMMISSIONER'S FINAL DECISION
AND DISMISSING THE CASE WITH PREJUDICE
RICARDO S. MARTINEZ, CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
seeks review of the partial denial of his application for
Disability Insurance Benefits. Plaintiff contends the ALJ
erred in assessing lay witness testimony, determining his
disability onset date, and relying on vocational expert
testimony. Dkt. 11. As discussed below, the Court AFFIRMS the
Commissioner's final decision and DISMISSES the case with
is currently 44 years old, has a high school education, and
has worked as a cook. Dkt. 7, Admin. Record (AR) 80, 33-34.
Plaintiff applied for benefits in September 2016, alleging
disability as of April 4, 2016. AR 80. Plaintiff's
applications were denied initially and on reconsideration. AR
79, 111. After the ALJ conducted a hearing in April 2018, the
ALJ issued a decision finding Plaintiff disabled beginning
November 21, 2017. AR 42, 21-36.
the five-step disability evaluation process,  the ALJ found
that from the April 2016 alleged onset date to the November
2017 established onset Dated:
Step one: Plaintiff did not engage in
substantial gainful activity.
Step two: Plaintiff had the following severe
impairments: degenerative disc disease, shoulder arthritis,
status post right shoulder rotator cuff repair, migraine
headaches, obesity, major depressive disorder, posttraumatic
stress disorder, adjustment disorder, and anxiety disorder.
Step three: These impairments did not meet
or equal the requirements of a listed
Residual Functional Capacity: Plaintiff
could perform sedentary work, lifting and carrying 10 pounds
occasionally and less than 10 pounds frequently. He could
stand or walk two hours and sit six hours per day. He could
never climb ladders, ropes, or scaffolds; occasionally climb
ramps and stairs; occasionally balance, stoop, crouch, kneel,
and crawl; occasionally reach overhead bilaterally; and
frequently reach in all other directions bilaterally. He
needed to avoid concentrated cold, vibrations, and hazards.
He could perform simple, routine, repetitive tasks,
consistent with unskilled work. He could tolerate occasional
interaction with coworkers and the public.
Step four: Plaintiff could not perform past
Step five: As there are jobs that exist in
significant numbers in the national economy that Plaintiff
could have performed, Plaintiff was not disabled.
24-36. The Appeals Council denied Plaintiff's request for
review, making the ALJ's decision the ...