Catherine M. v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec.

1

CATHERINE M.,^[1] Plaintiff, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant.

No. 21-CV-6283 (CJS)

United States District Court, W.D. New York

March 24, 2023

DECISION AND ORDER

CHARLES J. SIRAGUSA, United States District Judge

I. INTRODUCTION

In March 2021, Catherine M. (“Claimant”) filed this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), seeking judicial review of the Commissioner of Social Security's (“Commissioner”) denial of her applications for Disability Insurance Benefits (“DIB”) and Supplemental Security Income (“SSI”). Compl Mar. 29, 2021, ECF No. 1. Both parties moved for judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c). Pl.'s Mot., Jan. 31, 2022, ECF No. 14; Def.'s Mot., Mar. 31, 2022, ECF No. 17. For the reasons set forth below, Claimant's motion for judgment on the pleadings [ECF No. 14] is granted only to the extent that the matter is remanded for further administrative proceedings consistent with this decision and order. The Commissioner's motion [ECF No. 17] is denied. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case.

II. BACKGROUND

The Court assumes the reader's familiarity with the facts and procedural history in this case, and therefore addresses only those facts and issues which bear directly on the resolution of the motions presently before the Court.

A. Claimant's Applications

Claimant filed applications for DIB and SSI benefits in November 2017, alleging a disability onset date of September 16, 2017. Transcript (“Tr.”), 205 and 207,^[2] Aug. 17, 2021, ECF No. 9. She listed multiple physical and mental conditions that she claimed limited her ability to work: peripheral neuropathy, fibromyalgia, back problem, asthma, high cholesterol, depression, acid reflux, anxiety, high blood pressure, and a foot issue. Tr. 251. In March 2018, Claimant was found “not disabled,” and her claims for DIB and SSI benefits were denied. Tr. 90. Claimant requested a reconsideration of the initial determination and, after a review of the evidence in her case record by both a state agency psychological consultant (Tr. 101-02) and a state agency medical consultant (Tr. 105-06) in April 2018, Claimant was again found “not disabled.” T r. 109.

B. Claimant's Hearings Before the ALJ

After the Commissioner denied her applications at the initial level, Claimant appeared with counsel on April 16, 2020 for a hearing before an Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”). Tr. 36. In his opening remarks, Claimant's counsel stated the following:

. . . It's very difficult in this case to focus on any one thing. There's numerous issues up to and including now home care ....

* * *

There is . . . some botched surgeries or problems with her feet .... some neuropathy .... lifting and bending restrictions resulting from those issues

. . . a[n] application for a handicapped permit because the Claimant's unable to walk more than 200 feet at any one time .... Add that all up physically with the mental assessments . . . where it's clear there are severe problems .... in my opinion, is at a listing level ....

Tr. 43-44 (internal citations to the record omitted).

Claimant testified that she is 50 years old, a high school graduate, and can read, write, do simple math, and handle money. Tr. 45-48. She stated that she has been married for almost 17 years, and has two children and a husband, who works as a chemical processor for Eastman Kodak. Tr. 46. When the ALJ asked Claimant herself what prevents her from working a full-time job, Claimant identified “[t]he inability to sit in a chair for long periods of time .... carpal tunnel in [her] hands, in [her] wrists, neuropathy in [her] feet and [her] . . . lower back.” Tr. 48. She stated that she can only sit for about two hours at a time, can only stand or walk for about 20 minutes, only sleeps between four and five hours a night, and smokes a pack of cigarettes a day. Tr. 48-50. She said she takes hydrocodone for degenerative disc disease, Xanax for anxiety, Zoloft for depression, blood pressure medicine, medicine to reduce cholesterol, cyclobenzaprine for pain, amitriptyline, and has an inhaler for her asthma. Tr. 49.

In addition to her physical impairments, Claimant's counsel asked her about her mental impairments. Claimant testified that she had attempted suicide and was hospitalized for a night in 1999 or 2000, and has had “a few” panic attacks in which she gets “clammy and nervous,” most recently a year before the hearing. Tr. 51-52. She stated that she experiences general nervousness (Tr. 51), and sometimes has trouble following through on tasks that she starts. Tr. 52. However, she also stated that she does not have trouble understanding or following directions, making her own decisions, agreeing with authority figures, paying attention, or keeping appointments. Tr. 52. She said she has a good relationship with her friends and family, “usually got along good with [her] coworkers” but sometimes had misunderstandings, and sometimes has a problem remembering things. Tr. 53-55. In 2007 she saw a therapist for three months regarding communication issues she was having with her husband, but is being treated for anxiety and depression by “just [her] primary care doctor.” Tr. 54. She said that she went to her doctor for help controlling mood swings she was having, and that she does not have them when on the medication. Tr. 55.

With respect to her activities of daily living, Claimant testified that she lives at home with her husband and one of her children. Tr. 57. She stated that her husband does the cooking, cleaning, laundry, taking care of their disabled daughter, and taking care of the dogs. Tr. 57. Claimant cannot drive or go shopping alone, and has to use a motorized scooter while her husband helps her get things off the shelf. Tr. 56-57. She said she doesn't go out to church or to clubs, goes shopping only about once a month, and only goes to her friend's house to socialize once every three months. Tr. 57. On a typical day, she gets up, has coffee, watches TV, interacts with her animals and husband when he's home, and then goes to bed. Tr. 58. She stated that she can pick up five pounds at the most, and has trouble bending over and sometimes can't feel her fingers. Tr. 59. She can bathe and dress herself, but has trouble getting in and out of the bathtub or shower. Tr. 60. Her doctor prescribed her a “knee scooter” to use in her home because her right leg is non-weight bearing at present. Tr. 61.

In addition to Claimant's testimony, the ALJ also took testimony from an impartial vocational expert (VE) at the hearing. The VE classified Claimant's work at various jobs from 2005 to 2008 as “customer service representative,” her work at Volt Technology from 2008 to 2009 as an accounting clerk, and her work at the University of Rochester from 2009 to 2017 as a hospital insurance clerk. Tr. 64-66. In response to a hypothetical proposed by the ALJ that involved sedentary exertional work levels with limitations similar to those eventually reflected in Claimant's RFC, the VE testified that Claimant could both do her past relevant work, and perform a number of other positions available in the national economy. Tr. 68-69.

C. The ALJ's Decision

On April 29, 2020, the ALJ issued a decision finding that Claimant was not disabled, and therefore did not qualify for DIB or SSI benefits. Tr. 27.

At the outset, the ALJ found that Claimant met the insured status requirements for DIB benefits^[3] through December 31, 2022. Tr. 18. Then, at step one of the Commissioner's “five-step, sequential evaluation process,”^[4] the ALJ found that Claimant had not engaged in substantial gainful activity since the alleged onset date of September 16, 2017. Tr. 19.

At step two, the ALJ determined that Claimant has had the following severe impairments: degenerative disc disease of the lumbar spine, idiopathic peripheral neuropathy, degenerative joint disease of the knees, asthma, and status-post surgery for an infection in the heel of her right foot. Tr. 19. He found that Claimant's medically determinable physical impairment of mild bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome was non-severe. In addition, after performing the “special technique” required under 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520a and § 416.920a for all mental impairments,^[5] the ALJ concluded that Claimant's medically determinable mental impairments of depression and somatic symptoms disorder were non-severe because Claimant had only mild limitations in the four functional areas of ability to understand, remember or apply information; to interact with others; to adapt or manage herself; and to concentrate, persist, or maintain pace. Tr. 20.

At step three, the ALJ found that the severity of Claimant's impairments did not meet or medically equal the criteria of listings in 20 C.F.R. Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1, including Listing 1.04 - Disorders of the spine, and Listing 3.03 - Asthma. Tr. 21. Then, before proceeding to step four, the ALJ carefully considered the entire record and determined that Claimant had the residual functional capacity^[6] (“RFC”) to perform sedentary work as defined in 20 C.F.R. § 404.1567(a) and § 416.967(a), with the following limitations:

[She] can never climb ladders, ropes, or scaffolds, kneel, crouch, or crawl.

The claimant can frequently climb ramps or stairs or stop. The claimant must avoid concentrated exposure to extreme heat and cold, wetness, humidity, or respiratory irritants.

Tr. 22 (footnotes omitted).

At step four, the ALJ found that Claimant is capable of performing her past relevant work as an insurance clerk, accounting clerk, and the composite job of a customer service representative and telecommunicator. Tr. 25. At step five after considering the Medical-Vocational Guidelines, the ALJ found that in...