IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
May 15, 2012
KAREN DENICE EDMONDSON, PLAINTIFF,
MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, DEFENDANT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Gregory G. Hollows United States Magistrate Judge
Presently under submission are the parties' cross-motions for summary judgment. A review of the motions and the record indicates that further briefing on the issue of whether plaintiff meets Listing 7.02 is required.
The ALJ based her finding that plaintiff's menorrhagia and anemia were not to be considered*fn1 because plaintiff was "non-compliant with medication and treatment." (Tr. at 21.) The ALJ discussed at length the recommendations by physicians that plaintiff follow up with a gynecologist, and that although a hysterectomy was considered by practitioners, plaintiff failed to schedule this surgery or even obtain gynecological treatment for the cause of her anemia. (Id.)
The undersigned is mystified at the parties' failure to discuss the aforementioned reasoning. Plaintiff has presented evidence which most likely establishes that plaintiff meets Listing 7.02, but for her non-compliance in the face of medical recommendation, as set forth by the ALJ. The question, therefore, is whether plaintiff should have had to undergo a hysterectomy, or some less invasive procedure, in order to be considered compliant with recommended treatment.
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that: within fourteen days of this order, both parties shall file briefing on the question of whether the ALJ's finding that plaintiff was non-compliant with treatment excused the ALJ from evaluating whether plaintiff met Listing 7.02.