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.

Tadevosyan v. Colvin

United States District Court, E.D. California

March 31, 2014

MANVEL TADEVOSYAN, Plaintiff,
v.
CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant.

ORDER

EDMUND F. BRENNAN, Magistrate Judge.

Plaintiff seeks judicial review of a final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security ("Commissioner") denying his applications for a period of disability and Disability Insurance Benefits ("DIB") and for Supplemental Security Income ("SSI") under Titles II and XVI of the Social Security Act. The parties' cross-motions for summary judgment are pending. For the reasons discussed below, the court grants the plaintiff's motion and denies the Commissioner's motion.

I. BACKGROUND

Plaintiff filed applications for a period of disability, DIB, and SSI on February 18, 2009, alleging that he had been disabled since March 1, 2007. Administrative Record ("AR") 122-136.

Plaintiff's applications were denied initially and upon reconsideration. Id. at 78-81, 87-92. On September 1, 2010, a hearing was held before administrative law judge ("ALJ") Theodore Slocum. Id. at 31-67. Plaintiff was represented by a non-attorney at the hearing, at which plaintiff and a Vocational Expert ("VE") testified. Id.

On January 24, 2011, the ALJ issued a decision finding that plaintiff was not disabled under sections 216(i), 223(d), and 1614(a)(3)(A) of the Act.[1] Id. at 12-23. The ALJ made the following specific findings:

1. The claimant meets the insured status requirement of the Social Security Act through June 30, 2012.
2. The claimant has not engaged in substantial gainful activity since March 1, 2007, the alleged onset date. (20 CFR 404.1571 et seq., and 416.971 et seq. ).
3. The claimant has the following severe impairments: congenital exotropia, diabetes with ophthalmic manifestations, anxiety and depression (20 CFR 404.1520(c) and 416.920(c)).
* * *
4. At no time relevant did claimant 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 (20 CFR 404.1520(d), 404.1525, 404.1526, 416.920(d), 416.925, 416.926).
* * *
5. After careful consideration of the entire record, the undersigned finds that the claimant has the residual functional capacity a full range of work at all exertional levels but with the following limitations: postural limitations preclude scaffold/ladder/rope. Visually claimant has limited depth perception and he cannot do work requiring binocular vision. He should avoid concentrated exposure to hazards. However, the claimant is able to meet the basic mental and emotional demands of competitive remunerative unskilled work including the abilities (on a sustained basis) to understand, carry out, and remember simple instructions. He would be able to make simple work related decisions, respond appropriately to supervision, co-workers and work situations, deal with changes in a routine work setting, however claimant would do best in work settings requiring minimal social interaction.
* * *
6. The claimant is unable to perform any past relevant work (20 CFR 404.1565 and 416.965).
* * *
7. The claimant was born on May 20, 1964 and was 42 years old, which is defined as a younger individual age 18-49, on the alleged disability ...

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.