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.

Rojas v. Astrue

September 13, 2010

MARLON E. ROJAS, PLAINTIFF,
v.
MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, DEFENDANT.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: VICTOR B. Kenton United States Magistrate Judge

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

(Social Security Case)

This matter is before the Court for review of the decision by the Commissioner of Social Security denying Plaintiff's application for disability benefits. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §636(c), the parties have consented that the case may be handled by the Magistrate Judge. The action arises under 42 U.S.C. §405(g), which authorizes the Court to enter judgment upon the pleadings and transcript of the Administrative Record ("AR") before the Commissioner. The parties have filed the Joint Stipulation ("JS"), and the Commissioner has filed the certified AR.

Plaintiff raises the following issues:

1. Whether the Administrative Law Judge's ("ALJ") finding at step two that Plaintiff's mental impairments are not legally severe is based on a proper evaluation of evidence from treating, consulting, and non-examining sources;

2. Whether the ALJ's finding that Plaintiff's prescribed medications do not impose any functionally limiting side effects is based on a proper evaluation of treating physician evidence, medical expert testimony, and Plaintiff's subjective complaints.

(JS at 7.)

This Memorandum Opinion will constitute the Court's findings of fact and conclusions of law. After reviewing the matter, the Court concludes that for the reasons set forth, the decision of the Commissioner must be reversed.

I THE STEP TWO FINDING THAT PLAINTIFF DOES NOT HAVE A SEVERE MENTAL IMPAIRMENT IS NOT SUPPORTED BY SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE

In the ALJ's decision (AR 10-22), he concludes that the Plaintiff does not have a severe mental impairment:

"The [Plaintiff's] medically determinable mental impairments of an adjustment disorder and organic brain damage (due to a traumatic head injury) do not cause more than minimal limitation in the [Plaintiff's] ability to perform basic mental work activities and are therefore nonsevere." (AR 14.)

Plaintiff challenges the adequacy of this determination.

Plaintiff primarily relies upon the consultative complete psychological evaluation ("CE") of November 21, 2006 performed by Dr. Colonna, at the request of the Department of Social Services (See AR at 405-10), along with the Psychiatric Review Technique ("PRT") conclusions of the State Agency psychiatrist (AR 497-510), in particular, the conclusions of the State Agency psychiatrist ...


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.