Nuschler v. Commissioner of Social Security, No. 3:2019cv00005 - Document 22 (N.D. Miss. 2020)

Court Description: FINAL JUDGMENT in favor of Christian Michael Nuschler against Commissioner of Social Security. The case is REMANDED for further proceedings. CASE CLOSED. Signed by Magistrate Judge Jane M. Virden on 2/4/20. (ncb)

Download PDF
Nuschler v. Commissioner of Social Security Doc. 22 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI OXFORD DIVISION CHRISTIAN MICHAEL NUSCHLER, Plaintiff, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Civil No.: 3:19cv00005-JMV FINAL JUDGMENT This cause is before the court on Plaintiff’s complaint for judicial review of an unfavorable final decision of the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration denying a claim for supplemental security income. The parties have consented to entry of final judgment by the United States Magistrate Judge under the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), with any appeal to the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. The court, having reviewed the administrative record, the briefs of the parties, and the applicable law, and having heard oral argument, finds as follows: Consistent with the court’s ruling from the bench during a hearing held February 4, 2020, the court finds the ALJ’s step three determination is not supported by substantial evidence in the record. On remand, the ALJ must reconsider the claimant’s mental impairments beginning at step three of the sequential evaluation process. The ALJ must enlist the assistance of either a medical consultant or Medical Advisor (who shall be provided all the medical evidence of Dockets.Justia.com record) before making the step three determination. However, if the ALJ finds the evidence of record is insufficient to make a determination, the ALJ must either order a consultative examination of the claimant or otherwise fully and fairly develop the record. Ultimately, the ALJ will issue a new decision, but may conduct any additional proceedings not inconsistent with this decision. IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that this case is REVERSED and REMANDED for further proceedings. This, the 4th day of February, 2020. /s/ Jane M. Virden U. S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE 2

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.