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.

Danny Dial v. Michael J. Astrue

March 21, 2012

DANNY DIAL, PLAINTIFF,
v.
MICHAEL J. ASTRUE,COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, DEFENDANT.



ORDER

This social security action was submitted to the court without oral argument for ruling on plaintiff's motion for summary judgment and defendant's cross-motion for summary judgment. For the reasons explained below, plaintiff's motion is denied, defendant's motion is granted, and the decision of the Commissioner of Social Security (Commissioner) is affirmed.

PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

On May 23, 2009, plaintiff filed an application for Supplemental Security Income (SSI) under Title XVI of the Social Security Act (the Act), alleging disability beginning on June 1, 1985.*fn1 (Transcript (Tr.) at 13, 131.) Plaintiff's application was denied initially on September 24, 2009, and upon reconsideration on January 27, 2010. (Id. at 71-75, 70-83.) A hearing was held before an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) on June 9, 2010. (Id. at 30-65.) Plaintiff was represented by counsel and testified at the administrative hearing. In a decision issued on July 30, 2010, the ALJ found that plaintiff was not disabled. (Id. at 13-28.) The ALJ entered the following findings (citations to C.F.R. omitted):

1. The claimant has not engaged in substantial gainful activity since May 23, 2009, the application date.

2. The claimant has the following severe impairments: Borderline Intellectual Functioning ("BIF"); anxiety disorder, history of panic disorder, anti-social personality disorder.

3. The claimant does not have an impairment or combination of impairments that meets or medically equals one of the listed impairments in 20 CFR Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1.

4. After careful consideration of the entire record, the undersigned finds that the claimant has the residual functional capacity to perform a full range of work at all exertional levels but with the following non-exertional limitations: the claimant must be limited to low stress jobs and the performance of simple repetitive tasks with limited public contact.

5. The claimant has no past relevant work.

6. The claimant was born on October 1, 1960 and was 48 years old, which is defined as a younger individual age 18-49, on the date the application was filed.

7. The claimant has a limited education and is able to communicate in English.

8. Transferability of job skills is not an issue because the claimant does not have past relevant work.

9. Considering the claimant's age, education, work experience, and residual functional capacity, there are jobs that exist in significant numbers in the national economy that the claimant can perform.

10. The claimant has not been under a disability, as defined in the Social Security Act, since May 23, 2009, the ...


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.