Hutchinson v. Commissioner Social Security Administration
Filing
26
Findings & Recommendation: Pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S. C. § 405(g), it is recommended that defendant's motion to remand be granted in part; the decision of the Commissioner should be reversed and this matter remanded for payment of benefits. Objections to the Findings and Recommendation are due by 12/21/2009. If objections are filed, any responses to the objections are due within 10 days. Please access entire text by document number hyperlink. Ordered and signed on 12/01/2009 by Magistrate Judge Mark D. Clarke. (jw)
<![CDATA[
FILEII'09 DEC 0116:0211SDC-oRH
IN T H E U N I T E D S T A T E S D I S T R I C T C O U R T FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON DAN HUTCHINSON, Plaintiff, v. M I C H A E L 1. A S T R U E , C o m m i s s i o n e r , Social Security A d m i n i s t r a t i o n , Defendant. Civil No. 08-997-CL REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
C L A R K E , Magistrate Judge. P l a i n t i f f D a n H u t c h i n s o n brings t h i s action p u r s u a n t to s e c t i o n 2 0 5 ( g ) o f the Social Security Act, as a m e n d e d (Act), 4 2 U.S.C. §§ 405(g), t o o b t a i n j u d i c i a l r e v i e w o f t h e C o m m i s s i o n e r ' s final d e c i s i o n d e n y i n g p l a i n t i f f ' s a p p l i c a t i o n s for d i s a b i l i t y i n s u r a n c e b e n e f i t s a n d s u p p l e m e n t a l security i n c o m e benefits. D e f e n d a n t m o v e s for r e m a n d for further proceedings w h i c h p l a i n t i f f o p p o s e s . F o r t h e r e a s o n s e x p l a i n e d , d e f e n d a n t ' s m o t i o n s h o u l d b e g r a n t e d in part; the d e c i s i o n o f t h e C o m m i s s i o n e r s h o u l d be r e v e r s e d a n d t h e m a t t e r r e m a n d e d for p a y m e n t o f benefits.
II II
BACKGROUND
P l a i n t i f f a p p l i e d f o r b e n e f i t s a l l e g i n g d i s a b i l i t y b e g i n n i n g J u l y 1 7 , 2 0 0 3 . His a p p l i c a t i o n s were denied. P l a i n t i f f requested a hearing, which was held before an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) on October 2 3 , 2 0 0 6 . Plaintiff, represented by counsel, appeared and testified as did a vocational expert. On November 6, 2006, the ALJ rendered a partially favorable decision, finding plaintiff disabled as o f October 23, 2006. The Appeals Council denied p l a i n t i f f s request for review, making the ALJ's decision the final decision o f the Commissioner. Sims v. Apfel, 530 U.S. 103, 106-07 (2000) (and authorities cited). At the time o f p l a i n t i f f s alleged onset date o f July 1 7 , 2 0 0 3 , p l a i n t i f f was fifty years old and, at the time o f the hearing and the ALJ's decision, plaintiff was fifty-four years old. Plaintiff went to school until his second or third year o f high school, attending special education classes in reading in high school. P l a i n t i f f has past relevant work experience as a gravedigger, janitorial worker, warehouse worker, choke setter, and gas station attendant. P l a i n t i f f alleges disability b a s e d u p o n sacral t o r s i o n i n j u r y a n d d e g e n e r a t i v e disc d i s e a s e o f h i s l u m b a r s p i n e , l e a r n i n g d i s a b i l i t i e s r e s u l t i n g i n i l l i t e r a c y , a n d d e p r e s s i o n a n d anxiety.
STANDARDS
This Court must affirm the Commissioner's decision i f it is based o n the proper legal standards and the findings are supported by substantial evidence in the record. Hammock v. Bowen, 879 F.2d 498, 50 I (9 th Cir. 1989). Substantial evidence is "more than a mere scintilla. I t means such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion." Richardson v. Perales, 402 U.S. 3 8 9 , 4 0 1 (1971) (quoting Consolidated Edison Co. o f N . Y . v. NLRB, 305 U.S. 1 9 7 , 2 2 9 ( 1 9 3 8 » . The Court considers the record as a whole, and 2 - R E P O R T AND R E C O M M E N D A T I O N
weighs "both the e v i d e n c e t h a t supports and detracts from t h e [Commissioner's] conclusion." Martinez v. Heckler, 807 F . 2 d 771, 772 (9 th Cir. 1986). W h e r e the e v i d e n c e is susceptible o f more than one rational interpretation, the Commissioner's c o n c l u s i o n m u s t b e upheld. Sample v. Schweiker, 694 F . 2 d 639, 642 (9 th Cir. 1982). Questions o f credibility a n d resolution o f conflicts in the testimony are functions solely o f the Commissioner, Waters v. Gardner, 452 F.2d 855, 858 n.7 (9 th Cir. 1971), b u t any negative credibility findings m u s t b e s u p p o r t e d b y findings o n the record and su p p o rt ed b y substantial evidence, Ceguerra v. See'y o f H e a l t h & H u m a n Servs., 933 F.2d 735, 738 (9 th Cir. 1991). T h e findings o f the C o m m i s s i o n e r as to any fact, i f supported by s u b s t a n t i a l e v i d e n c e , s h a l l b e c o n c l u s i v e . 4 2 U . S . C . § 4 0 5 ( g ) . H o w e v e r , e v e n w h e r e f i n d i n g s are s u p p o r t e d b y s u b s t a n t i a l e v i d e n c e , " t h e d e c i s i o n s h o u l d be s e t a s i d e i f t h e p r o p e r legal s t a n d a r d s were not applied i n w e i g h i n g the evidence and making the decision." Flake v. Gardner, 399 F.2d 5 3 2 , 5 4 0 (9 th Cir. 1968); see also A l l e n v. Heckler, 749 F.2d 577, 579 (9 th Cir. 1984). U n d e r sentence four o f 42 U . S . c . § 405(g), the C o u r t has the p o w e r to enter, u p o n the pleadings and t r a n s c r i p t r e c o r d , a j u d g m e n t a f f i r m i n g , m o d i f y i n g , o r r e v e r s i n g t h e d e c i s i o n o f the C o m m i s s i o n e r , w i t h o r w i t h o u t r e m a n d i n g t h e c a u s e for a r e h e a r i n g .
COMMISSIONER'S DECISION
The initial b u r d e n o f p r o o f rests u p o n the c l a i m a n t to e s t a b l i s h disability. H o w a r d v. Heckler, 782 F .2d 1484, 1486 (9 th Cir. 1986). To m e e t this burden, a c l a i m a n t m u s t demonstrate a n " i n a b i l i t y t o e n g a g e in a n y s u b s t a n t i a l g a i n f u l a c t i v i t y b y r e a s o n o f a n y m e d i c a l l y d e t e r m i n a b l e physical o r mental i m p a i r m e n t w h i c h c a n be expected to result i n d e a t h o r w h i c h has lasted or can be expected to last for a c o n t i n u o u s p e r i o d o f not less t h a n 12 m o n t h s . . . . " 42 U.S.C. § 4 2 3 ( d ) ( l )(A).
3 - REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
A five-step s e q u e n t i a l p r o c e s s exists for d e t e r m i n i n g w h e t h e r a p e r s o n is disabled. B o w e n v. Yuckert, 4 8 2 U.S. 137, 140 (1987); 20 C.F.R. §§ 4 0 4 . 1 5 2 0 , 4 1 6 . 9 2 0 . In step one, the C o m m i s s i o n e r d e t e r m i n e s w h e t h e r a c l a i m a n t is e n g a g e d in "substantial gainful activity." Yuckert, 4 8 2 U.S. at 140; 20 C.F.R. §§ 404. 1520(b), 4 1 6 . 9 2 0 ( b ) . In the p r e s e n t case, t h e A L l f o u n d t h a t p l a i n t i f f h a d n o t e n g a g e d i n s u b s t a n t i a l g a i n f u l a c t i v i t y since J u l y 1 7 , 2 0 0 3 . (Tr. 2 5 . ) In s t e p t w o , t h e C o m m i s s i o n e r d e t e r m i n e s w h e t h e r t h e c l a i m a n t h a s " a m e d i c a l l y s e v e r e i m p a i r m e n t o r c o m b i n a t i o n o f i m p a i r m e n t s . " I f the C o m m i s s i o n e r f i n d s i n t h e n e g a t i v e , the c l a i m a n t is d e e m e d n o t disabled. I f the C o m m i s s i o n e r finds a s e v e r e i m p a i r m e n t o r c o m b i n a t i o n thereof, the inquiry m o v e s to step three. Yuckert, 482 U.S. at 140-41; 2 0 C . F . R . §§ 404.1520(c), 4 1 6 . 9 2 0 ( c ) . In t h e i n s t a n t c a s e , t h e A L J f o u n d t h a t p l a i n t i f f s l e a r n i n g d i s o r d e r , d e p r e s s i o n , anxiety, l u m b a r b a c k disorder, and carpel tunnel s y n d r o m e c o n s t i t u t e s e v e r e impairments. (Tr. 2 5 - 2 6 . ) A c c o r d i n g l y , t h e i n q u i r y m o v e d t o s t e p three. In s t e p t h r e e , t h e a n a l y s i s f o c u s e s o n w h e t h e r t h e i m p a i r m e n t o r c o m b i n a t i o n o f i m p a i r m e n t s m e e t s o r e q u a l s " o n e o f a n u m b e r o f l i s t e d i m p a i r m e n t s t h a t t h e [C o m m i s s i o n e r ] a c k n o w l e d g e s a r e so s e v e r e a s t o p r e c l u d e s u b s t a n t i a l g a i n f u l a c t i v i t y . " Y u c k e r t , 4 8 2 U . S . a t 140-41; see 2 0 C.F.R. §§ 404. 1520(d), 416.920(d). I f s o , the c l a i m a n t is c o n c l u s i v e l y p r e s u m e d d i s a b l e d ; i f n o t , t h e a n a l y s i s p r o c e e d s t o s t e p four. Y u c k e r t , 4 8 2 U . S . a t 141. I n t h i s c a s e , t h e A U found t h a t p l a i n t i f f d i d n o t h a v e an i m p a i r m e n t o r c o m b i n a t i o n o f i m p a i r m e n t s t h a t meets o r m e d i c a l l y e q u a l s o n e o f t h e l i s t e d i m p a i r m e n t s . (Tr. 2 6 - 2 7 . ) In s t e p f o u r , t h e C o m m i s s i o n e r d e t e r m i n e s w h e t h e r t h e c l a i m a n t c a n s t i l l p e r f o r m h i s "past relevant work." I f t h e c l a i m a n t is so able, t h e n the C o m m i s s i o n e r finds the c l a i m a n t "not
4 - REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
disabled." Otherwise, the inquiry advances to step five. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(e), 416.920(e). T h e C o m m i s s i o n e r m u s t first i d e n t i f y t h e c l a i m a n t ' s residual f u n c t i o n a l c a p a c i t y (RFC), w h i c h s h o u l d r e f l e c t t h e i n d i v i d u a l ' s m a x i m u m r e m a i n i n g a b i l i t y t o p e r f o r m s u s t a i n e d w o r k a c t i v i t i e s in an ordinary w o r k setting for eight hours a day, five days a week. Social Security Ruling (SSR) 96-8p. The RFC is based o n all relevant evidence in the case record, including the treating physician's medical opinions about what an individual can still do despite impairments. Id. In t h i s c a s e , t h e A L l f o u n d t h a t p l a i n t i f f r e t a i n s an R F C t o p e r f o r m l i g h t w o r k , a n d : is limited to lifting 20 p o u n d s occasionally lifting 10 p o u n d s frequently; sitting/ s t a n d i n g / w a l k i n g for 6 h o u r s i n a n 8 - h o u r w o r k d a y ; f r e q u e n t b a l a n c i n g ; o c c a s i o n a l c l i m b i n g , s t o o p i n g , kneeling, c r o u c h i n g and c r a w l i n g ; a n d u n l i m i t e d pushing/pulling [and] is limited to simple tasks. (Tr. 27-29.) The A L l found that p l a i n t i f f was unable to p e r f o r m any p a s t relevant work. (Tr. 29.) In step five, the burden is o n the Commissioner to establish t h a t the claimant is capable o f performing other w o r k t h a t exists in the national economy. Yuckert, 482 U.S. at 141-42; 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(f), 416.920(f). I f the Commissioner fails to m e e t this burden, then the claimant is deemed disabled. Here, the A L l found that, prior to O c t o b e r 2 3 , 2 0 0 6 , considering p l a i n t i f f s age, education, w o r k experience, and RFC, there were a significant n u m b e r o f j o b s in the national economy he could have performed (Tr. 30); and, beginning o n October 2 3 , 2 0 0 6 , c o n s i d e r i n g p l a i n t i f f s age, e d u c a t i o n , w o r k e x p e r i e n c e , a n d R F C , t h e r e are n o t a s i g n i f i c a n t n u m b e r o f j o b s i n t h e n a t i o n a l e c o n o m y t h a t p l a i n t i f f c o u l d p e r f o r m (Tr. 3 1 ) . T h e r e f o r e , t h e A L l found that p l a i n t i f f was n o t disabled p r i o r to October 2 3 , 2 0 0 6 , b u t became disabled on that date. (Tr. 23, 31.)
5 - REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
DISCUSSION P l a i n t i f f asserts that the A L l ' s decision should be reversed because it is not supported by substantial evidence and contains errors o f law. Plaintiff contends, in part, that the A L l erred in his application o f the Medical-Vocational Guidelines; he contends that, based o n his age, the A L l ' s findings that p l a i n t i f f is limited to light work and that he is illiterate and has no transferrable skills, and applying N i n t h Circuit law, he is disabled u n d e r Medical-Vocational Guidelines Rule 202.09. In Silveira v. Apfel, 204 F.3d 1257, 1260-61 (9 th Cir. 2000), the Ninth C i r c u i t h e l d t h a t , " i n a p p l y i n g t h e g r i d r u l e s the C o m m i s s i o n e r m u s t t r e a t a s k i l l e d o r s e m i skilled work history with no transferable skills as equivalent to an unskilled work history." See S S R 82.41. R u l e 2 0 2 . 0 9 o f t h e M e d i c a l - V o c a t i o n a l G u i d e l i n e s a p p l i e s t o i n d i v i d u a l s l i m i t e d to light work who are "closely approaching advanced age"--age 50-54, 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1563(d), 4 1 6 . 9 6 3 ( d ) - a n d are "Illiterate or unable to communicate in English," with previous work experience o f "Unskilled or none." 20 C.F.R. Pt. 404, Subpt. 4, App. 2. Under Rule 202.09, a person meeting these factors warrants a finding o f disabled. See Silveira, 204 F .3d at 1261. The Commissioner agrees that "Plaintiff would be found disabled as o f age 50 by application o f Grid rule 202.09 based o n his illiteracy and o n his skilled or semi-skilled work history with a lack o f transferable skills being legally equivalent to an unskilled work history." (Defs. Mem. at 6.) However, defendant goes on to argue that, upon further examination o f the evidence, it is unclear i f p l a i n t i f f is illiterate and, therefore, the matter should be remanded so that the A L l can evaluate the evidence to determine i f there is substantial evidence to support his finding o f i l l i t e r a t e .
6 - R E P O R T AND R E C O M M E N D A T I O N
The court declines to remand so that the A L l may have a second opportunity to assess p l a i n t i f f s literacy. The A L l specifically found that "The claimant is illiterate but is able to communicate in English." (Tr. 29.) Rule 202.09 requires that the individual be "Illiterate or unable to communicate in English." (Emphasis added.) See Silveira, 204 F .3d at 1261-62 & n. 13 ("[A claimant] is 'illiterate or unable to communicate in English' i f h e is either illiterate in English or unable to communicate in English or both.") (citing Chavez v. Dept. o f Health & Human Servs., 103 F.3d 849, 852 (9 th Cir. 1996)). The A L l ' s finding that plaintiff is illiterate is supported by substantial evidence in the record. There is no need to develop the record further on this issue. 1 Because the record is fully developed, this matter should be remanded for p a y m e n t o f benefits. RECOMMENDATION Based on the foregoing, and pursuant to sentence four o f 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), it is recommended that defendant's motion to remand be granted in part; the decision o f the Commissioner should be reversed and this matter remanded for payment o f benefits. This recommendation is n o t an order that is immediately appealable to the Ninth Circuit Court o ( A p p e a l s . Any notice o f appeal pursuant to Rule 4 ( a ) ( l ) , Federal Rules o f Appellate Procedure, should not be filed until entry o f the district court's j u d g m e n t or appealable order. Objections to this Report a n d Recommendation. i(any. are due b y December 21. 2009. I f objections are filed. any responses to the objections are due within 10 days, see Federal Rules o f Civil Procedure 72 a n d 6. Failure to timely file objections to any factual determinations o f the
Because o f the court's resolution o f this issue, it is unnecessary to address plaintiffs other contentions.
1
7 - REPORT AND R E C O M M E N D A n O N
Magistrate Judge will be considered a waiver o f a party's right to de novo consideration o f the factual issues and will constitute a waiver o f a party's right to appellate review o f the findings o f fact in an order or j u d g m e n t entered pursuant to the Magistrate Judge's recommendation. D A T E D this / er,2009 .
.. /
ARK D. CLARKE U n i t e d States Magistrate J u d g e
8 - REPORT AND R E C O M M E N D A T I O N
]]>
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?
