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.

Singh v. Berryhill

United States District Court, E.D. California

February 20, 2018

SANDRA SINGH, Plaintiff,
v.
NANCY A. BERRYHILL, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, [1]Defendant.

          ORDER DIRECTING ENTRY OF JUDGMENT IN FAVOR OF DEFENDANT NANCY A. BERRYHILL, ACTING COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, AND AGAINST PLAINTIFF SANDRA SINGH

          GARY S. AUSTIN UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

         I. INTRODUCTION

         Plaintiff, Sandra Singh (“Plaintiff”), seeks judicial review of the final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security (“Commissioner” or “Defendant”) denying her application for Disability Insurance Benefits (“DIB”) pursuant to Title II of the Social Security Act. The matter is currently before the Court on the parties' briefs (Docs. 11, 12, and 13) which were submitted without oral argument to the Honorable Gary S. Austin, United States Magistrate Judge.[2] After reviewing the administrative record, the Court finds the decision is supported by substantial evidence. Accordingly, the Court denies Plaintiff's appeal.

         II. BACKGROUND AND PRIOR PROCEEDINGS

         A. Background

         Plaintiff previously worked as a program technician for the County of Fresno for many years. AR 19; 36-37. She was was diagnosed with lymphedema of the left arm in 2008 following a partial mastectomy of the left breast, as well as restless leg syndrome and hypertension. AR 1717. On November 7, 2012, she filed an application for DIB alleging disability beginning October 18, 2012. AR 11; 150-157. The parties agree that Plaintiff properly exhausted her administrative remedies and that the Appeals Council denied Plaintiff's appeal. (Doc. 11, pg. 3 and Doc. 12, pg. 1-2). Therefore, this appeal is a review of Administrative Law Judge Cynthia Floyd's (“ALJ”) decision issued on May 22, 2015, which is considered the Commissioner's final order. See, 42 U.S.C. §§ 405(g), 1383(c)(3). AR 11-22.

         B. Summary of the Medical Record

         The Court has reviewed the entire medical record. AR 216-1810. Because the parties are familiar with the factual background of this case, including Plaintiff's medical history, the Court will not exhaustively summarize these facts in this order. Relevant portions of the medical record related to Plaintiff's physical impairments and treatment raised in this appeal will be referenced in this decision where appropriate.

         III. THE DISABILITY DETERMINATION PROCESS

         To qualify for benefits under the Social Security Act, a plaintiff must establish that he or she is unable to engage in substantial gainful activity due to a medically determinable physical or mental impairment that has lasted or can be expected to last for a continuous period of not less than twelve months. 42 U.S.C. § 1382c(a)(3)(A). An individual shall be considered to have a disability only if:

. . . his physical or mental impairment or impairments are of such severity that he is not only unable to do his previous work, but cannot, considering his age, education, and work experience, engage in any other kind of substantial gainful work which exists in the national economy, regardless of whether such work exists in the immediate area in which he lives, or whether a specific job vacancy exists for him, or whether he would be hired if he applied for work.

42 U.S.C. § 1382c(a)(3)(B).

         To achieve uniformity in the decision-making process, the Commissioner has established a sequential five-step process for evaluating a claimant's alleged disability. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a). The ALJ proceeds through the steps and stops upon reaching a dispositive finding that the claimant is or is not disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4). The ALJ must consider objective medical evidence and opinion testimony. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1513.

         Specifically, the ALJ is required to determine: (1) whether a claimant engaged in substantial gainful activity during the period of alleged disability; (2) whether the claimant had medically-determinable “severe” impairments; (3) whether these impairments meet or are medically equivalent to one of the listed impairments set forth in 20 C.F.R. § 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1; (4) whether the claimant retained the residual functional capacity (“RFC”) to perform his past relevant work; and (5) whether the ...


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.