United States District Court, E.D. California
DALE A. DROZD, Magistrate Judge.
This social security action was submitted to the court without oral argument for ruling on plaintiff's motion for summary judgment. For the reasons explained below, plaintiff's motion is granted, defendant's cross-motion is denied, the decision of the Commissioner of Social Security ("Commissioner") is reversed, and the matter is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this order.
On June 28, 2010, plaintiff filed applications for Disability Insurance Benefits ("DIB") under Title II of the Social Security Act ("the Act") and for Supplemental Security Income ("SSI") under Title XVI of the Act alleging disability beginning on March 31, 2009. (Transcript ("Tr.") at 53, 115-26.) Plaintiff's applications were denied initially, (id. at 67-72), and upon reconsideration. (Id. at 75-79.) Plaintiff requested a hearing and a hearing was held before an Administrative Law Judge ("ALJ") on February 23, 2012. (Id. at 6-26.) Plaintiff appeared without representation and testified at the administrative hearing. (Id. at 7-8.) In a decision issued on July 27, 2012, the ALJ found that plaintiff was not disabled. (Id. at 61.) The ALJ entered the following findings:
1. The claimant meets the insured status requirements of the Social Security Act through December 31, 2014.
2. The claimant has not engaged in substantial gainful activity since March 31, 2009, the alleged onset date (20 CFR 404.1571 et seq., and 416.971 et seq. ).
3. The claimant has the following severe impairments: degenerative disc disease; chronic cervical and lumbosacral pain; hypertension; and obesity (20 CFR 404.1520(c) and 416.920(c)).
4. The claimant does not have an impairment or combination of impairments that meets or medically equals the severity of 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 and 416.926).
5. After careful consideration of the entire record, the undersigned finds that the claimant has the residual functional capacity to perform light work as defined in 20 CFR 404.1567(b) and 416.967(b) except she is capable of occasionally pushing and pulling with her bilateral upper extremities and lower extremities; occasionally balancing, stooping, kneeling, crouching, crawling, and climbing.
6. The claimant is capable of performing past relevant work as a security guard. This work does not require the performance of work-related activities precluded by the claimant's residual functional capacity (20 CFR 404.1565 and 416.965).
7. The claimant has not been under a disability, as defined in the Social Security Act, from March 31, 2009, through the date of this decision (20 CFR 404.1520(f) and 416.920(f)).
(Id. at 55-60.)
On August 22, 2013, the Appeals Council denied plaintiff's request for review of the ALJ's July 27, 2012 decision. (Id. at 1-3.) Plaintiff sought judicial review pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) by ...