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.

Gonzalez v. Colvin

United States District Court, C.D. California

July 20, 2015

LISA RENE GONZALEZ, Plaintiff,
v.
CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

KENLY KIYA KATO, Magistrate Judge.

Plaintiff Lisa Rene Gonzalez seeks review of the final decision of the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration denying her application for Title II Disability Insurance Benefits. The parties have consented to the jurisdiction of the undersigned United States Magistrate Judge, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). For the reasons stated below, the Commissioner's decision is REVERSED and this action is REMANDED for further proceedings consistent with this Order.

I.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Plaintiff Lisa Rene Gonzalez ("Plaintiff") brings this action seeking to overturn the decision of the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration (hereinafter the "Commissioner" or the "Agency") denying her Title II application for Disability Insurance Benefits ("DIB"). Plaintiff filed her initial claim on March 29, 2013 alleging a disability onset date of November 23, 2012. Administrative Record ("AR") at 163-164. On May 16, 2013, the claim was denied. Id. at 59-63.

On June 17, 2013, Plaintiff filed a written request for hearing. Id. at 64-65. On June 10, 2014, a hearing was held before Administrative Law Judge ("ALJ") Keith Dietterle. Id. at 25-44.

On June 24, 2014, the ALJ issued a decision denying Plaintiff's application. Id. at 8-24. On August 21, 2014, Plaintiff asked the Agency's Appeals Council to review the ALJ's decision. Id. at 5-7. On September 11, 2014, the Appeals Council denied Plaintiff's request for review. Id. at 1-4.

On October 20, 2014, Plaintiff filed the instant action. (ECF Docket No. ("dkt.") 3). This matter is before the Court on the parties' Joint Stipulation ("JS"), filed July 15, 2015, which the Court has taken under submission. (Dkt. 15).

II.

RELEVANT FACTUAL BACKGROUND

Plaintiff was born on December 6, 1962, and her alleged disability onset date is November 23, 2012. AR at 175. She was 49 years old at the time of the onset date, and 50 years old at the time of the hearing before the ALJ. Plaintiff graduated from high school. See id. at 180. In her Disability Report, Plaintiff reported she worked as a bank teller from July 2008 through August 2012 and a pharmacy technician from 2007 to 2008. Id. Plaintiff alleges disability based upon a left broken ulna, broken middle finger, and severe depression. Id. at 179.

III.

STANDARD FOR EVALUATING DISABILITY

To qualify for DIB, a claimant must demonstrate a medically determinable physical or mental impairment that prevents her from engaging in substantial gainful activity, and that is expected to result in death or to last for a continuous period of at least twelve months. Reddick v. Chater, 157 F.3d 715, 721 (9th Cir. 1998). The impairment must render the claimant incapable of performing the work she previously performed and incapable of performing any other substantial gainful employment that exists in the national economy. Tackett v. Apfel, 180 F.3d 1094, 1098 (9th Cir. 1999).

To decide if a claimant is disabled, and therefore entitled to benefits, an ALJ conducts a five-step inquiry. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520, 416.920. The steps are:

(1) Is the claimant presently engaged in substantial gainful activity? If so, the claimant is found not disabled. If not, proceed to step two.
(2) Is the claimant's impairment severe? If not, the claimant is found not disabled. If so, proceed to step three.
(3) Does the claimant's impairment meet or equal one of the specific impairments listed in 20 C.F.R. Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1? If so, the claimant is found disabled. If not, proceed to step four.[1]
(4) Is the claimant capable of performing work she has done in the past? If so, the claimant is found not disabled. If not, proceed to step five.
(5) Is the claimant able to do any other work? If not, the claimant is found disabled. If so, the claimant is found not disabled.

Tackett, 180 F.3d at 1098-99; see also Bustamante v. Massanari, 262 F.3d 949, 953-54 (9th Cir. 2001); 20 C.F.R. §§ ...


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.