Reynolds v. Commissioner of Social Security, No. 5:2018cv00103 - Document 22 (W.D. Ky. 2019)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER by Magistrate Judge Lanny King on 7/8/2019. A separate judgment shall enter.cc:counsel (KJA)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Reynolds v. Commissioner of Social Security Doc. 22 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY PADUCAH DIVISION CIVIL ACTION NO. 5: 8 CV 3 LLK TIMOTHY RAY REYNOLDS PLAINTIFF issio er of So ial Se urity DEFENDANT . NANCY A. BERRYHILL, A ti 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 # The Cou t ill ‘EMAND this atte to the Co a d . The pa ties i e this ase, ith a . issio e fo a e de isio e ause the Ad i ist ati e La Judge ALJ failed to o side the o atio al i pa t of Plai tiff s u i atio u ge a d did ot gi e good easo s fo dis ou ti g the opi io of his t eati g ph si ia . The ALJ erred i faili g to o sider the o atio al i pa t of Plai tiff’s uri atio urge y. Plai tiff suffe s f o a o ge ital kid e / ladde o ditio . Ad i ist ati e ‘e o d A‘ at . He testified that I ha e th ee kid e s. A‘ at , . The ALJ oted that a CT s a e ealed a dupli ated ight e al olle tio s ste ith t o sepa ate o dilated u ete s [a d] a left e al st. A‘ at efe e i g A‘ at . Plai tiff has ee diag osed ith ladde a e . A‘ at . The ALJ a k o ledged that Plai tiff suffe s f o a se e e, o o atio all sig ifi a t, kid e diso de a d ladde a e . Id. Plai tiff testified that I just ha e pai i kid e s ; I ll p o a l go to the ath oo ti es a da ; it o es o ui kl [so] I e got to sta lose to a est oo . A‘ at to . The VE testified Dockets.Justia.com that Plai tiff ould e u e plo a le if he ust al a s ha e a ess to a ath oo lose a d eeds to go he e e [he] eed[s] to go i.e., ot just du i g s heduled eaks . A‘ at . The VE added that I ha e o ked ith ladde a d p ostate a e i di iduals a d the a e ause of thei lea i g the o k statio too ofte . A‘ at e e tuall get te e t . It affe ts p odu ti it a d the i ated. Id. The ALJ fou d that Plai tiff e a e disa led o Ap il , di e t appli atio of ‘ule et ee Ma ot sustai e plo , . his fift fifth i thda ased o a of Appe di of the egulatio s. A‘ at he Plai tiff alleges he e a e disa led th ough Ap il , that Plai tiff as ot disa led e ause he etai ed the a ilit to pe fo the atio al e o o . Fo the losed pe iod , the ALJ fou d a sig ifi a t u su h as ele ato ope ato , ge e al offi e helpe , asse e of jo s i le , a d ashie . A‘ at . The ALJ ased this fi di g of o disa ilit du i g the losed pe iod upo a o atio al h potheti al that e pli itl a o odated o u s heduled ath oo eaks. A‘ at . Although the ALJ fou d that Plai tiff suffe s f o a o atio all sig ifi a t kid e diso de a d ladde a e , the ALJ i luded o o k elated li itatio e.g., u i atio u ge i pai e ts i fo ased o those ulati g he esidual fu tio al apa it ‘FC fi di g. A‘ at . The ALJ s de isio is also sile t o the uestio s of hethe Plai tiff e ui es f e ue t ath oo eaks as alleged a d, if so, the f e ue a d du atio of su h eaks. A e a d is e ui ed i this ase fo a e de isio add essi g the a o e uestio s fo t o easo s. Fi st, [t]he ALJ a Jeley v. Co the ALJ a i pai ot ha e it oth a s he a disa li g le el o u i atio u ge ’r of So . Se ., No. : ot fi d a i pai CV , WL , . That is, e t to e se e e a d the fail to i lude a li itatio asso iated ith the e t hile fashio i g a ‘FC. Id. uoti g Lutz v. Co at * “.D. Ohio “ept. , at * “.D. Ohio Ja . , is alleged. 'r, No. : , WL , . “e o d, he e a lai a t alleged a eed fo f e ue t ath oo eaks a d the ALJ offe ed o a al sis of the issue, the ou t [is] p e luded f o e gagi g i ea i gful e ie a d e a d [is] a a ted. Hooks v. Co , iti g M Nelis v. Co See also Sherrill v. Co adopted, 'r, No. ’r, No. : WL CV , WL , WL , WL , at * E.D. T . “ept. , at * E.D. Mi h. “ept. , at * “.D. Ohio Ap il , e a di g fo the ALJ to dete plai tiff's e ui ed ath oo fo ’r, No. : i e the f e ue , . epo t a d du atio of eaks a d the p a ti al o k da li itatio s esulti g the ef o i ulati g plai tiff's ‘FC. . The ALJ’s de isio failed to gi e good reaso s for dis ou ti g Dr. Patel’s opi io s, hi h, if a epted, ould pre lude light ork duri g the losed period. Fo the pe iod et ee Ma , a d Ap il , , the ALJ fou d that Plai tiff etai ed the a ilit to pe fo light o k. A‘ at . [T]he full a ge of light o k e ui es sta di g o alki g, off a d o , fo a total of app o i atel hou s of a hou o kda . “o ial “e u it ‘uli g ““‘ WL , at * . “itti g a o u i te I Fe ua , a e itte tl du i g the e ai i g ti e. Id. Plai tiff testified that he ould sta d fo p o a l fi e to te i utes a d alk fo a ds efo e ha i g to sit do due to pai a d fatigue a d e ause his left leg goes u . A‘ at . , Plai tiff s t eati g ph si ia , Bha at Patel, o pleted a edi al assess e t fo , fi di g, a o g othe thi gs, that, du i g a hou o kda , Plai tiff ould sta d a d alk o ti uousl fo hou s a d ould alte atel sit fo less tha hou s a d sta d/ alk fo less tha hou s. A‘ at . D . Patel stated that his opi io as p e ised upo the follo i g diag oses: “e e e DDD [dege e ati e dis disease] of e ti e spi e, “/P [status post] lu a su ge , CAD [ o o a a te disease] ith ste ts, adi ulopath ith eu opath of oth legs, ta h a d HTN [ta h a dia a d h pe te sio ], dep essio , a e of ladde , d slipide ia. Patie t is totall disa led ith o ha e of e o e . Id. The ALJ ga e o eight to D . Patel s assess e t e ause the li itatio s p o ided a e e t e e a d i o siste t ith D . Patel s o t eat e t e o ds a d i agi i g a d e ause [d]u i g the A lu a spi e adiog aph e ealed post su gi al ha ges at L “ a d ulti le el dege e ati e dis disease a d fa et a th opath , a d e i al a d tho a i spi e adiog aphs e ealed ulti le el a d diffuse dege e ati e ha ges. A‘ at . lai a t s ost e e t offi e isit [ ith D . Patel,] D . Patel i di ated that [Plai tiff] had a o o al se satio , a d o al us le st e gth. A‘ at al gait, . As oted a o e, D . Patel fou d that Plai tiff suffe s f o adi ulopath a d eu opath i his legs a d o o a a te disease ith ste ts. A‘ at ith the u . ‘adi ulopath a d eu opath a e asso iated ess to hi h Plai tiff testified, a d o o a a te disease ith ste ts is asso iated ith the alleged fatigue. A‘ at . The efo e, o t a to the ALJ s fi di g A‘ at , it as ot e t e e a d i o siste t that D . Patel fou d that Plai tiff as u a le to sustai a sig ifi a t sta di g/ alki g ega dless of hethe he had o . p o ides that al gait, o al se satio , a d o al us le st e gth. e ill al a s gi e good easo s i ou oti e of dete C.F.‘. i atio o de isio fo the eight e gi e ou t eati g sou e s edi al opi io . The ALJ s de isio failed to gi e good easo s fo dis ou ti g D . Patel s opi io s. This is sig ifi a t e ause, if a epted, D . Patel s opi io s ould p e lude the light o k, hi h the ALJ fou d Plai tiff ould pe fo Kar es v. Co du i g the losed pe iod. ’r is disti guisha le. Fi all , Plai tiff a gues that a e a d is e ui ed fo esse tiall the sa e easo s ide tified i Kar es v. Co ’r, No. : CV LLK, WL W.D. K . Fe . , . Like this ase, the ALJ i Kar es a a ded Ka es e efits afte he fift fifth i thda pu sua t to a di e t appli atio of the Appe di ules. The Cou t e a ded fo e o side atio of Ka es disa ilit status fo the losed pe iod et ee the alleged o set of disa ilit date a d Ka es fift fifth i thda . The easo fo the e a d as the p ohi itio agai st that, i the fe da s to fe e ha i al appli atio of the g id ules he the e is e ide e o ths p e edi g the ha ge i age atego , the lai a t suffe ed D . Patel s t eat e t otes o sisted of ha d itte otes o hat appea s to e a p i tout fo o tai i g t pe itte te t tailo ed to ea h patie t. Plai tiff s t pe itte otes state: CN“ [ e t al e ous s ste ] DT‘ [deep te do efle es] No al Moto No al “e so No al Gait No al “ee, e.g., A‘ at , , , …, , , , …, , , , … At ti es, the ha d itte otes o t adi t the t pe itte otes, fo e a ple, the ote at A‘ i luded the ge e i Gait No al, ut D . Patel ote Plai tiff alks ith li p as usual. additio al o atio al ad e sit , hi h the ALJ failed to o side . Id. at * uoti g Bla k ur v. Co No. , WL , at * th Ci . 'r, . The additio al o atio al ad e sit i Kar es o sisted of the fa t that Ka es as e o e i g f o e k su ge i the eeks i ediatel p e edi g he fift fifth i thda , a d he t eati g ph si ia opi ed that she ould e u a le to o k at a e e tio al le el du i g e o e . I this ase, i o t ast, Plai tiff ide tifies a d the Cou t fi ds o additio al o atio al ad e sit i the eeks p e edi g his fift fifth i thda . “tated so e hat diffe e tl , hile the ALJ s fi di g that Plai tiff ould pe fo light o k du i g the losed pe iod a o a ot e suppo ted su sta tial e ide e, the e is o e ide e aki g that fi di g pa ti ula l u suppo ted fo the latte po tio of the pe iod. Order Fo the fo egoi g easo s, this atte is he e ‘EMANDED to the Co issio e fo a e de isio o siste t ith this Opi io a d fo a fu the p o eedi gs dee ed e essa a d app op iate the Co issio e . July 8, 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.
