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.

Jay V. v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration

United States District Court, D. Oregon

July 4, 2018

JAY V., [1] Plaintiff,
v.
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, Defendant.

          George J. Wall Attorney for Plaintiff

          Billy J. Williams Renata Gowie U.S. Attorney's Office District of Oregon

          Alexis L. Toma Social Security Administration Attorneys for Defendant

          OPINION & ORDER

          MARCO A. HERNÁNDEZ UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

         Plaintiff Jay V. brings this action for judicial review of the Commissioner's final decision denying his application for Disability Insurance Benefits (“DIB”) under Title II of the Social Security Act. The Court has jurisdiction under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) (incorporated by 42 U.S.C. § 1382(c)(3)). Because the Commissioner's decision is free of legal error and supported by substantial evidence, it is affirmed and this case is dismissed.

         BACKGROUND

         Plaintiff was born on August 17, 1960, and was fifty years old on March 31, 2011, the alleged disability onset date. Tr. 14, 21.[2] Plaintiff earned a high school diploma and has past relevant work experience as a machinist. Tr. 21. Plaintiff claims he is disabled based on alleged chronic headaches, left shoulder degenerative joint disease, and degenerative disc disease of the cervical spine. Plaintiff's benefits application was denied initially on December 4, 2013, and on reconsideration on April 9, 2014. Tr. 14. A hearing was held before Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) Steve Lynch on October 27, 2015. Tr. 28-56. ALJ Lynch issued a written decision on November 23, 2015, finding Plaintiff not disabled. Tr. 11-27. The Appeals Council declined review, rendering ALJ Lynch's decision the Commissioner's final decision that Plaintiff now challenges in this Court. Tr. 1-5.

         SEQUENTIAL DISABILITY ANALYSIS

         A claimant is disabled if she is unable to “engage in any substantial gainful activity by reason of any medically determinable physical or mental impairment which . . . has lasted or can be expected to last for a continuous period of not less than 12 months.” 42 U.S.C. § 423(d)(1)(A). Disability claims are evaluated according to a five-step procedure. Valentine v. Comm'r Soc. Sec. Admin., 574 F.3d 685, 689 (9th Cir. 2009). The claimant bears the ultimate burden of proving disability. Id.

         At the first step, the Commissioner determines whether a claimant is engaged in “substantial gainful activity.” If so, the claimant is not disabled. Bowen v. Yuckert, 482 U.S. 137, 140 (1987); 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(b), 416.920(b). At step two, the Commissioner determines whether the claimant has a “medically severe impairment or combination of impairments.” Yuckert, 482 U.S. at 140-41; 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c), 416.920(c). If not, the claimant is not disabled.

         At step three, the Commissioner determines whether claimant's impairments, singly or in combination, meet or equal “one of a number of listed impairments that the [Commissioner] acknowledges are so severe as to preclude substantial gainful activity.” Yuckert, 482 U.S. at 141; 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(d), 416.920(d). If so, the claimant is conclusively presumed disabled; if not, the Commissioner proceeds to step four. Yuckert, 482 U.S. at 141.

         At step four, the Commissioner determines whether the claimant, despite any impairment(s), has the residual functional capacity (“RFC”) to perform “past relevant work.” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(e), 416.920(e). If the claimant can, the claimant is not disabled. If the claimant cannot perform past relevant work, the burden shifts to the Commissioner. At step five, the Commissioner must establish that the claimant can perform other work. Yuckert, 482 U.S. at 141-42; 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(e) & (f), 416.920(e) & (f). If the Commissioner meets its burden and proves that the claimant is able to perform other work which exists in the national economy, the claimant is not disabled. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1566, 416.966.

         THE ALJ'S DECISION

         At step one, the ALJ found that Plaintiff had not engaged in substantial gainful activity from March 31, 2011, through December 31, 2014. Tr. 16.

         At step two, the ALJ found the Plaintiff had the following severe impairments: “left shoulder degenerative joint disease, degenerative disc disease of the cervical spine, and chronic headache.” Tr. 16.

         At step three, the ALJ found that Plaintiff did not have an impairment or combination of impairments that met or medically equaled the severity of one of the listed impairments. Tr. 17.

         Before proceeding to step four, the ALJ determined that Plaintiff had the RFC to perform light work with the following limitations: “[Plaintiff] can occasionally climb, balance, stoop, kneel, crouch, and crawl. The claimant is limited to occasional overhead reaching with the non-dominant left upper extremity.” Tr. 18.

         At step four, the ALJ determined that Plaintiff could not perform any ...


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.