United States District Court, E.D. California
F. BRENNAN, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
seeks judicial review of a final decision of the Commissioner
of Social Security (“Commissioner”) denying her
application for Supplemental Security Income
(“SSI”) under Title XVI of the Social Security
Act. The parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment
are pending. ECF Nos. 13 & 14. For the reasons discussed
below, the Commissioner’s cross-motion is denied and
plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment is granted. The
matter is remanded to the Administrative Law Judge
(“ALJ”) for additional administrative
filed an application for SSI, alleging that she had been
disabled since April 1, 2012. Administrative Record
(“AR”) 319. Plaintiff’s application was
denied initially and upon reconsideration. Id. at
223-26, 234-39. On June 29, 2016, a hearing was held before
ALJ Plauche Villere, Jr. Id. at 170-191.
December 8, 2016, the ALJ issued a decision finding that
plaintiff was not disabled under section 1614(a)(3)(A) of the
Id. at 19-31. The ALJ made the following specific
1. The claimant has not engaged in substantial gainful
activity since April 10, 2013, the application date (20 CFR
416.971 et seq.).
2. The claimant has the following severe combination of
impairments: degenerative disc disease of the lumbar and
cervical spine; joint pain; neuropathy of the feet; asthma
with tobacco use disorder; obesity; anxiety; depression (20
* * *
3. 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 416.920(d), 416.925 and 416.926).
* * *
4. 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 416.967(b) in that she can lift and carry, push and pull
twenty pounds occasionally and ten pounds frequently. She can
sit for six hours of an eight hour day and stand and walk for
six hours of an eight hour day. Except, she must avoid
concentrated exposure to fumes, odors, dust, gases, poor
ventilation, etc.’ she can only perform simple routine
repetitive tasks with only occasional contact with others,
including only non-interactional contact with the public.
* * *
5. The claimant is unable to perform any past relevant work
(20 CFR 416.965).
* * *
6. The claimant was born on August 24, 1970 and was 42 years
old, which is defined as a younger individual age 18-49, on
the date the application was filed (20 CFR 416.963).
7. The claimant has at least a high school education and is
able to communicate in English (20 CFR 416.964).
8. Transferability of job skills is not material to the
determination of disability because using the
Medical-Vocational Rules as a framework supports a finding
that the claimant is “not disabled, ” whether or
not the claimant has transferable job skills (See SSR 82-41
and 20 CFR Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 2).
9. Considering the claimant’s age, education, work
experience, and residual functional capacity, there are jobs
that exist in significant numbers in the national economy
that the claimant ...