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.

Brown v. Colvin

United States District Court, C.D. California, Western Division

December 12, 2014

DENNIS ANTHONY BROWN, Plaintiff,
v.
CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant

For Dennis Anthony Brown, Plaintiff: William M Kuntz, LEAD ATTORNEY, William M Kuntz PLC, Riverside, CA.

For Carolyn W Colvin, Acting Commissioner of Social Security Administration, Defendant: Assistant U.S. Attorney LA-CV, LEAD ATTORNEY, Office of U.S. Attorney, Civil Division, Los Angeles, CA; Assistant U.S. Attorney LA-SSA, LEAD ATTORNEY, Office of the General Counsel for Social Security Adm., San Francisco, CA; Jacob M Mikow, LEAD ATTORNEY, SAUSA - Office of U.S. Attorney, Social Security Administration, San Francisco, CA.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

VICTOR B. KENTON, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.

(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 record before the Commissioner. The parties have filed the Joint Stipulation (" JS"), and the Commissioner has filed the certified Administrative Record (" AR").

Plaintiff raises the following issues:

1. Whether the Administrative Law Judge's (" ALJ") conclusion at Step Five of the sequential evaluation process is supported by substantial evidence.

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

I

THE ALJ'S STEP FIVE SEQUENTIAL EVALUATION CONCLUSION THAT PLAINTIFF IS CAPABLE OF PERFORMING OTHER OCCUPATIONS IS SUPPORTED BY SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE

As reflected in the ALJ's Decision (AR 10-20), Plaintiff filed a Title II application for period of disability and disability insurance benefits (" DIB"), on August 31, 2012, alleging an onset date of April 20, 2009. Plaintiff's date last insured (" DLI") is December 31, 2009. (AR 190.) Plaintiff thus had the burden to establish his disability on or before the DLI in order to be eligible for DIB. See Vincent o/b/o Vincent v. Heckler, 739 F.2d 1393, 1394 (9th Cir. 1984).

In a Disability Report - Adult (AR 193-199), Plaintiff alleged that he was disabled due to PTSD (Post Traumatic Stress Disorder), anxiety disorder, schizophrenia, readjustment disorder, and hearing issues. (AR 194.)

Plaintiff proceeded through the administrative process, and was denied initially and upon reconsideration. He then requested and received a hearing before the ALJ, which occurred on November 14, 2013. (AR 24-64.) The ALJ's unfavorable Decision was issued on November 27, 2013.

In the ALJ's Decision, the well-known sequential evaluation process (see 20 C.F.R. ยง 404.1520(a)) was followed . (AR 10-12.) At Step Four, the ALJ determined Plaintiff's ...


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.