Kyle v. Commissioner of Social Security, No. 5:2018cv00063 - Document 31 (W.D. Ky. 2019)

Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER by Magistrate Judge Lanny King on 7/22/2019. A separate judgment shall enter.cc:counsel (KJA) Modified on 7/24/2019 to edit signed date (KJA).

Download PDF
Kyle v. Commissioner of Social Security Doc. 31 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY PADUCAH DIVISION CIVIL ACTION NO. : 8 CV 3 LLK GREGORY ALLAN KYLE PLAINTIFF issio er of Social Security DEFENDANT v. NANCY A. BERRYHILL, Acti g Co MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER This atte is efo e the Cou t o Plai tiff's o plai t seeki g judi ial e ie , pu sua t to U.“.C. § g , of the fi al de isio of the Co e efits. The fa t a d la su issio e de i g his lai fo “o ial “e u it disa ilit a ies of Plai tiff a d Defe da t a e at Do kets # ha e o se ted to the ju isdi tio of the u de sig ed Magist ate Judge to dete appeal l i g efo e the “i th Ci uit Cou t of Appeals. Do ket # a d . The pa ties i e this ase, ith a . Be ause Plai tiff’s a gu e ts a e u pe suasi e a d the Ad i ist ati e La Judge’s ALJ’s de isio is suppo ted su sta tial e ide e, the Cou t ill AFFIRM the Co issio e ’s fi al de isio a d DI“MI““ Plai tiff’s o plai t. The ALJ’s fi di gs The ALJ de ied Plai tiff disa ilit lai at the fifth a d fi al step of the fa ilia fi e step se ue tial e aluatio p o ess. Fi st, the ALJ fou d that Plai tiff has ot e gaged i su sta tial gai ful a ti it si e Fe ua , , he he alleges he e a e disa led. Ad i ist ati e Re o d AR at ALJ fou d that Plai tiff has the follo i g se e e, o o atio all sig ifi a t, i pai . “e o d, the e ts: histo of su sta e a use; a seizu e diso de ; a og iti e diso de ; al ohol elated eu opath ; a shoulde diso de ; a d dep essio . Id. Thi d, the ALJ fou d that Plai tiff does ot suffe f o a i pai satisf i g the li i al ite ia of a i pai e t e t listed i Appe di of the egulatio s. Id. Dockets.Justia.com As e ui ed i a ase that ad a ed e o d step , the ALJ dete fu tio al apa it RFC . The ALJ fou d that Plai tiff’s ph si al i pai li ited a ge of light o k. AR at i ed Plai tiff’s esidual e ts allo hi to pe fo a . He a sit, sta d, a d alk up to si hou s ea h i a eight hou o kda , ith the a ilit to ha ge positio s ithout lea i g the o kstatio , ut he should e e e e posed to u p ote ted heights o da ge ous a hi e to e t e e heat. Id. Plai tiff’s e tal i pai a d he should a oid o e t ated e posu e e ts allo hi to pe fo e t le el o k ith si ple step p o edu es, ut he should a oid o k e ui i g fast pa ed asse l li es o igid p odu tio uotas o o e tha o asio al a d asual o ta t ith the pu li . Id. Fou th, the ALJ fou d that Plai tiff is u a le to pe fo a past ele a t o k. AR at . Fifth, the ALJ fou d that Plai tiff has ot ee disa led th ough the De e he etai s the a ilit to pe fo a sig ifi a t u e , de isio date e ause e of light jo s i the atio al e o o su h as egg ashi g a hi e te de , ag i ultu al p odu e so te , a d o og a a hi e te de . AR at . First argu e t Plai tiff akes fou a gu e ts. Fi st, he a gues that his seizu e diso de eets o e uals the li i al ite ia of Listi g . , hi h add esses o ulsi e epileps . Do ket # at . The ALJ stated that she had o sulted app op iate listi gs i this ase, i ludi g listi gs u de se tio [] … . a d fou d, ega di g Plai tiff’s seizu e diso de , that the edi al e ide e of e o d fails to sho a listi g le el of se e it … o a sustai ed asis. AR at . Fo the easo s elo , the ALJ’s fi di g is suppo ted su sta tial e ide e. Listi g . e ui es that Plai tiff e pe ie e o ulsi e seizu es o e tha o e a o th, despite p es i ed t eat e t. The ALJ fou d that Plai tiff does ot follo p es i ed t eat e t: [Plai tiff’s] seizu e a ti it [si e Ma , ] has ee spo adi , a d see s to ha e easo a l ee ell o t olled if [Plai tiff] is o plia t ith his edi atio . Fo i sta e, o Ma h , , [Plai tiff] epo ted that his last seizu e o u ed o No e e , . At this ti e, he i di ated that thought Kepp a had o t i uted to hi ei g fee f o seizu e a ti it . [AR at .] U fo tu atel , the lai a t has ot al a s take his Kepp a as p es i ed. O “epte e , , he as do u e ted to e i o siste t i taki g his doses of Kepp a. [AR at .] The e ide e o tai s othe e a ples of o o plia e. Nota le, [Plai tiff] as epo ted to ha e left the hospital agai st edi al ad i e o Ma , , afte p ese ti g to the e e ge oo ith seizu e a ti it . [AR at , .] AR at . Plai tiff ad its that he has he o siste tl st uggles ith taki g edi atio due to his e o issues. Do ket # at . This is ell do u e ted as a o goi g issue. Id. Plai tiff states that he has athe p ofou d e o loss a d is uite depe de t o his othe fo his li i g safel a d edi atio o plia e. Do ket # at iti g AR at . Plai tiff’s u de of p o i g that he satisfies the Listi g is st i tl o st ued e ause the Listi g ep ese ts a auto ati s ee i g i of a i pai e t as pe se disa li g i depe de tl of a othe edi al o o atio al fa to . See Ela e rel. Gola v. Co 'r, F. d , th Ci . i suffi ie t that a lai a t o es lose to eeti g the e ui e e ts of a listed i pai . It is e t. . Listi g does ot e use o o plia e ith p es i ed t eat e t e ause e o issues a e p ese t. Plai tiff’s a gu e t that his seizu e diso de satisfies Listi g . is u pe suasi e. Seco d argu e t Plai tiff’s se o d a gu e t is that the ALJ’s esidual fu tio al apa it RFC dete ot suppo ted i atio is su sta tial e ide e e ause the ALJ’s edi ilit fi di gs a e u suppo ted. I othe o ds, the ALJ should ha e a epted Plai tiff’s testi o of li itatio s i e ess of the ALJ’s RFC fi di g. Do ket # at Work a v. Co . A ALJ’s edi ilit assess e t ust e a o ded g eat eight a d defe e e. ’r, F. App’ , th Ci . . We ha e held that a [ALJ’s] edi ilit fi di gs a e i tuall u halle gea le a se t o pelli g easo s. Ritchie v. Co th Ci . F. App’ , . Plai tiff ide tifies o o pelli g easo s fo se o d guessi g the ALJ’s edi ilit fi di gs. ’r, Third argu e t Plai tiff’s thi d a gu e t is that the ALJ’s RFC dete i atio is u suppo ted e ause the ALJ e ed i appl i g the ules fo eighi g edi al opi io s. “pe ifi all , the ALJ allegedl e ed i assig i g little eight to the opi io s of Ji E. Cou h, D.O. [do to of osteopathi edi i e], Beth E. F ost, D.O., a d Rafael Ve osla sk , Ps .D. [do to of ps holog ]. ALJ’s de isio at AR , I Ju e , . , Ji Plai tiff’s e uest. AR at E. Cou h, D.O., o pleted the Atte di g Ph si ia Rest i tio s fo AR at at . Plai tiff ha a te izes D . Cou h as his t eati g ph si ia , et Plai tiff ad its that D . Cou h t eated hi o o l isits Do ket # i Ma h efe e i g opi io s at AR , a d i Ju e at i Ja ua he D . Cou h o pleted the fo AR at AR at oted that D . Cou h just appea s to ha e sta ted t eati g [Plai tiff] this ea [i.e., , . The ALJ ]. AR at . [I]t is uestio a le hethe a ph si ia ho e a i es a patie t o l th ee ti es o e a fou o th pe iod is a t eati g sou e as opposed to a o t eati g ut e a i i g sou e. Hel v. Co F. App’ . th Ci . ; see also Mireles e rel. S.M.M. v. Co ’r, F. App’ , 'r, th Ci . th ee isit edi al sou e lassified as o sulta t . I a e e t, ega dless of hethe D . Cou h as a t eati g o a e a i i g/ o sultati e sou e, the ALJ ide tified su sta tial easo s fo gi i g his opi io little eight : [D . Cou h’s] opi io , hi h ould effe ti el p e lude o petiti e e plo e t, o e states [Plai tiff’s] li itatio s. A o g othe thi gs, D . Cou h opi ed that [Plai tiff] ould eed to f e ue tl est, e li e, o lie do , a d that he ould iss fou o o e da s of o k a o th. This is p e ised o e o [Plai tiff’s] su je ti e o plai ts, a d is a ifestl ot suppo ted o o siste t ith the o je ti e edi al e ide e. What is o e, D . Cou h just appea s to ha e sta ted t eati g [Plai tiff] this ea . Fo these easo s, little eight, as opposed to o t olli g eight, a e gi e to D . Cou h’s edi al sou e state e t. AR at . A t eati g ph si ia ’s opi io is e titled to o t olli g eight if it is ell suppo ted edi all a epta le li i al a d la o ato diag osti te h i ues a d is ot i o siste t ith the othe su sta tial e ide e i ou ase e o d. C.F.R. §§ . , . . I Ap il , Beth E. F ost, D.O., e a i ed Plai tiff at the e uest of the Co p o ided a opi io ega di g Plai tiff’s ph si al i pai e ts a d li itatio s. AR at issio e a d . The ALJ ide tified su sta tial easo s fo gi i g little eight to D . F ost’s opi io : [D . F ost’s opi io ] too [like D . Cou h’s opi io ] o e states [Plai tiff’s] li itatio s, a d is p e ised o e o [Plai tiff’s] su je ti e o plai ts. I fa t, the o je ti e ph si al fi di gs e o ded D . F ost elie he opi io . “aid fi di gs e ealed out of ilate al g ip a d uppe a d lo e e t e it st e gth. AR at . The ALJ’s gi i g little eight to D . F ost’s opi io is fu the suppo ted the ALJ’s gi i g sig ifi a t eight to the fi di gs of the “tate age p og a ph si ia , hi h spe ifi all took i to a ou t D . F ost’s fi di gs. “ee ALJ’s de isio at AR efe e i g p og a ph si ia ’s fi di gs at AR , hi h ite D . F ost’s fi di gs. I app op iate i u sta es, opi io s f o “tate age edi al ... o sulta ts ... a e e titled to g eate eight tha the opi io s of t eati g o e a i i g sou es. Blakle v. Co I De e ’r, F. d e , , i o th Ci . . e tio ith a p io u su essful appli atio fo e efits, De “p ague, Ph.D., e a i ed Plai tiff a d p o ided a opi io of Plai tiff’s e tal li itatio s. AR at . I Ap il , i o is B. e tio ith the p ese t appli atio , Rafael Ve osla sk , Ps .D., e a i ed Plai tiff a d p o ided a opi io . AR at . The ALJ ide tified su sta tial easo s fo gi i g little eight to D . Ve osla sk ’s opi io a d sig ifi a t eight to D . “p ague’s opi io : [D . Ve osla sk ’s] opi io , hi h effe ti el uestio s [Plai tiff’s] a ilit to pe fo e e si ple tasks, is ot o e su ate ith the o je ti e ps hologi al t eat e t e o d. Mo eo e , it is ot o siste t ith all of the o se atio s ade D . Ve osla ks . Of pa ti ula ote, D . Ve osla sk i di ated [Plai tiff] to ha e ade uate judg e t a d de isio aki g a ilities. … D . “p ague suggested [Plai tiff] to ha e o o e tha a ode ate le el of i pai e t. This is ge e all o e su ate ith the o je ti e ps hologi al t eat e t e o d. AR at . The ALJ’s gi i g little eight to D . Ve osla sk ’s opi io is fu the suppo ted the ALJ’s gi i g sig ifi a t eight to the fi di gs of the “tate age took i to a ou t D . Ve osla sk ’s fi di gs. AR at , . p og a ps hologist, hi h spe ifi all Fourth argu e t Plai tiff’s fou th a d fi al a gu e t is that the ALJ’s fifth step fi di g is ot suppo ted su sta tial e ide e i light of the o atio al e pe t’s VE’s testi o that: The ide tified jo s a e p e luded if i additio to ei g u a le to pe fo fast pa ed o k Plai tiff is u a le to pe fo f e ue t pa ed o k; E plo e s ge e all do ot tole ate o e tha t o jo a se es pe o th; a d D . Cou h’s fi di gs, if a epted, ould p e lude e e sede ta jo s. Do ket # efe e i g VE’s testi o at AR , at . The a gu e t is u pe suasi e e ause Plai tiff ide tifies o e ide e, hi h the ALJ as e ui ed to a ept, that: He is u a le to pe fo f e ue t pa ed o k; He ould e ui e o e tha t o jo a se es pe o ths; o D . Cou h’s fi di gs a u atel state his li itatio s. Order Be ause Plai tiff’s a gu e ts a e u pe suasi e a d the Ad i ist ati e La Judge’s ALJ’s de isio is suppo ted su sta tial e ide e, the Co issio e ’s fi al de isio is he e AFFIRMED, a d Plai tiff’s o plai t is DI“MI““ED. July 22, 2019

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.