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. Berryhill

United States District Court, C.D. California

March 6, 2017

ROSA MORENA GONZALEZ, Plaintiff,
v.
NANCY A. BERRYHILL, Acting Commissioner of Social Security[1], Defendant.

          MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER OF REMAND

          HONORABLE JACQUELINE CHOOLJIAN UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.

         I. SUMMARY

         On July 1, 2016, Rosa Morena Gonzalez ("plaintiff) filed a Complaint seeking review of the Commissioner of Social Security's denial of plaintiff s application for benefits. The parties have consented to proceed before the undersigned United States Magistrate Judge.

         This matter is before the Court on the parties' cross motions for summary judgment, respectively ("Plaintiffs Motion") and ("Defendant's Motion"). The Court has taken both motions under submission without oral argument. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 78; L.R. 7-15; July 6, 2016 Case Management Order ¶ 5.

         Based on the record as a whole and the applicable law, the decision of the Commissioner is REVERSED AND REMANDED for further proceedings consistent with this Memorandum Opinion and Order of Remand.

         II. BACKGROUND AND SUMMARY OF ADMINISTRATIVE

         DECISION

         On December 19, 2012, plaintiff filed an application for Disability Insurance Benefits alleging disability beginning on August 13, 2011, due to back, breathing, hernia, and heart problems. (Administrative Record ("AR") 16, 200). The Administrative Law Judge ("ALJ") examined the medical record and heard testimony from plaintiff (who was represented by counsel) and a vocational expert on November 3, 2014. (AR 28-56).

         On January 9, 2015, the ALJ determined that plaintiff was not disabled through the date of the decision. (AR 16-24). Specifically, the ALJ found: (1) plaintiff suffered from the following severe impairments: degenerative disc disease of the cervical spine with cervical strain, degenerative disc disease of the lumbar spine with radiculopathy, dyspepsia, helicobacter pylori infection, gastroesophageal reflux disease, hyperlipidemia, and fracture of the left fibula (AR 18); (2) plaintiffs impairments, considered singly or in combination, did not meet or medically equal a listed impairment (AR 20); (3) plaintiff retained the residual functional capacity to perform medium work (20 C.F.R. § 404.1567(c)) with additional limitations[2](AR 20); (4) plaintiff could perform her past relevant work as a bakery packer (AR 22); (5) alternatively, there are also jobs that exist in significant numbers in the national economy that plaintiff could perform, specifically industrial cleaner, courtesy clerk, and furniture cleaner (AR 22-23); and (6) plaintiffs statements regarding the intensity, persistence, and limiting effects of subjective symptoms were not entirely credible (AR 20-21).

         On May 4, 2016, the Appeals Council denied plaintiffs application for review. (AR 1).

         III. APPLICABLE LEGAL STANDARDS

         A. Sequential Evaluation Process

          To qualify for disability benefits, a claimant must show that the claimant is unable "to engage in any substantial gainful activity by reason of any medically determinable physical or mental impairment which can be expected to result in death or which has lasted or can be expected to last for a continuous period of not less than 12 months." Molina v. Astrue, 674 F.3d 1104, 1110 (9th Cir. 2012) (quoting 42 U.S.C. § 423(d)(1)(A)) (internal quotation marks omitted). The impairment must render the claimant incapable of performing the work the claimant 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) (citing 42 U.S.C. § 423(d)(2)(A)).

         In assessing whether a claimant is disabled, an ALJ is required to use the following five-step sequential evaluation process:

(1) Is the claimant presently engaged in substantial gainful activity? If so, the claimant is not disabled. If not, proceed to step two.
(2) Is the claimant's alleged impairment sufficiently severe to limit the claimant's ability to work? If not, the claimant is not ...

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.