Gray v. Kijakazi

1

YAFAH GRAY, Plaintiff, v. KILOLO KIJAKAZI, ^[1] Acting Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant.

Civil Action No. 20 Civ. 4636 (SLC)

United States District Court, S.D. New York

March 31, 2022

OPINION & ORDER

SARAH L. CAVE, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.

I. INTRODUCTION

Plaintiff Yafah Gray (“Ms. Gray”) commenced this action pursuant to Section 205(g) of the Social Security Act (the “Act”), as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). Ms Gray seeks review of the decision by the Commissioner (the “Commissioner”) of the Social Security Administration (“SSA”), denying her applications for Supplemental Security Income (“SSI”) and Disability Insurance Benefits (“DIB”) under the Act. Ms. Gray contends that the decision of the Administrative Law Judge dated May 23, 2019 (the “ALJ Decision”) “is not supported by substantial evidence and applies an erroneous standard of law[, ]” and asks the Court to reverse the Commissioner's finding that she was not disabled and remand for an award of SSI and DIB benefits, or a new hearing. (ECF No. 1 at 1-2).

On February 5, 2021, Ms. Gray filed a motion for summary judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(a).^[2] (ECF No. 10 (“Ms. Gray's Motion”)). On April 6, 2021, the Commissioner cross-moved for judgment on pleadings pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c). (ECF No. 12 (the “Commissioner's Motion”)). For the reasons set forth below, Ms. Gray's Motion is GRANTED, the Commissioner's Motion is DENIED, and the case is remanded for further proceedings.

II. BACKGROUND

A. Procedural Background

On September 22, 2016 and October 25, 2016, Ms. Gray filed applications for DIB and SSI, respectively, alleging disability due to injuries to her left knee, left ankle, back, right arm and shoulder, neck, and both hands and wrists, with an onset date of September 9, 2015 (the “Onset Date”). (Administrative Record (“R.”) (ECF No. 9) 64-65, 74-75, 165-80). On January 4, 2017, the SSA denied Ms. Gray's applications. (R. 62-83). At Ms. Gray's request, on May 6, 2019, ALJ Ryan A. Alger conducted a hearing by videoconference (the “Hearing”). (R. 42-61, 102-03). On May 23, 2019, ALJ Alger issued the Decision finding that Ms. Gray was not disabled under the Act. (R. 10-25). On May 12, 2020, the ALJ Decision became the final decision of the Commissioner when the Appeals Council denied Ms. Gray's request for review. (R. 1-6).

B. Factual Background

1. Non-medical evidence

Ms. Gray was born in 1969 and was 45 years old on the alleged Onset Date. (R. 64, 74). She is a high school graduate. (R. 48). From June 1995 to September 2015, she worked as a “Developmental Aide, ” assisting handicapped adults with their daily activities. (R. 48-49, 55-56, 72, 205). In 2009, Ms. Gray was involved in a motor vehicle accident, which resulted in “cervical and lumbosacral injuries.” (R. 390; see R. 376). On July 10, 2011, “[w]hile [Ms. Gray was] working as a development aide, a combative male resident suddenly grabbed her and pushed her up against a wall and violently shook her[, ]” causing injury to her neck and lower back. (R. 503). On September 23, 2013, Ms. Gray was injured at work when “a cabinet door fell on [her] left knee and foot.” (R. 306).

2. Medical evidence

Ms. Gray and the Commissioner have each provided detailed summaries of the medical evidence in the Record. (See ECF Nos. 11 at 4-14; 13 at 6-18; 14 at 6-12). The Court adopts both parties' summaries as accurate and complete and sets forth those facts relevant to the Court's analysis. (See § III.B infra).

C. Administrative Proceedings

1. The Hearing

On May 6, 2019, ALJ Alger conducted the Hearing, at which Ms. Gray was represented by counsel. (R. 42-61). Ms. Gray described the nature and symptoms of her impairments. (R. 4854). She testified, inter alia, that, due to her impairments, she experienced “pain that shoots up and down [the] back of [her] neck and shoulder” as well as pain and swelling in her leg, was unable to “do the things [she] used to do all the time[, ]” and was taking “a lot” of pain medication, including oxycodone, methadone, and Percocet. (R. 51-52).

Vocational Expert (“VE”) Richard Hall also testified at the Hearing. (R. 56-60). VE Hall classified Ms. Gray's past work as that of a Residential Care Aide, Dictionary of Occupational Titles (“DOT”)^[3] code 355.377-018, a “medium” category position.^[4] (R. 56-57). ALJ Alger then posed the following hypothetical individual:

someone with the same age, education, and work experience as [Ms. Gray], [who] could perform light work as defined; however, they could perform no overhead work with the right upper extremity; they could occasionally climb stairs and ramps, but no ladders, ropes, or scaffolds; they could occasionally perform bending, stooping, and crouching; no kneeling or crawling.

(R. 57).^[5] VE Hall testified that this hypothetical individual could not perform Ms. Gray's past work, but could perform the following three positions:

• Cashier, DOT code 211.462-010, a light position of which there were approximately 130, 000 in the national economy;

• Office Helper, DOT code 239.567-010, a light position of which there were approximately

115, 000 in the national economy; and • Retail Marketer, DOT code 209.587-034, a light position of which there were approximately 120, 000 in the national economy.

(R. 57-58). VE Hall testified that no jobs existed for the same hypothetical individual if “the person needed to take rest breaks throughout the day, in addition to normal breaks given, at least three times a day for 15 minutes or more[.]” (R. 59).

2. The ALJ Decision and Appeals Council review

On May 23, 2019, ALJ Alger issued his Decision finding that Ms. Gray had not been disabled from the Onset Date and denying Ms. Gray SSI and DIB. (R. 10-25).

ALJ Alger followed the five-step disability determination process. At step one, the ALJ found that Ms. Gray had not engaged in substantial gainful activity since the alleged Onset Date. (R. 12). At step two, ALJ Alger found that Ms. Gray had the following severe impairments: degenerative disease of both the cervical and lumbar spine; arthritis of the left knee and left ankle; status-post right rotator cuff repair; and obesity. (R. 13-16).

At step three, ALJ Alger found that Ms. Gray did not have an impairment or combination of impairments that met or medically equaled the severity of one of the listed impairments in the Act. (R. 16-17). (The impairments listed in 20 CFR Appendix 1, Subpart P, Part 404 are known as the “Listings.”). Specifically, the ALJ found that Ms. Gray's: (i) shoulder and knee impairments did not satisfy Listing 1.02 for major joint dysfunction; (ii) spine-related impairments did not satisfy Listing 1.04 for disorders of the spine; and (iii) arthritis did not satisfy Listing 14.09 for inflammatory arthritis. (R. 16).^[6]

ALJ Alger then assessed Ms. Gray's RFC as being able to:

perform light work as defined in 20 CFR 404.1567(b) and 416.967(b) except that [she] could perform no overhead work with the right upper extremity[, ] . . . could occasionally climb ramps and stairs, but no ladders, ropes, or scaffolds[, ] . . . could occasionally perform bending stooping, and crouching[, and] could not kneel or crawl.

(R. 17-18).

In reaching his RFC determination, ALJ Alger concluded that, while Ms. Gray's “medically determinable impairments could reasonably be expected to cause the alleged symptoms, ” her “statements concerning the intensity, persistence and limiting effects of these symptoms are not entirely consistent with the medical evidence and other evidence in the record ....” (R. 18). The ALJ noted, inter alia, that, “[d]espite her reports of pain radiating into her extremities, electrodiagnostic testing revealed normal findings, noting no evidence of radiculopathic, neuropathic, or myopathic process[, ]” and that a 2018 examination showed Ms. Gray “retained nearly full strength of the back” and “[a] normal gait[.]” (R. 19 (citing R. 455, 501-08)). ALJ Alger also noted that, during a 2016 consultative examination, Ms. Gray “demonstrated a full range of cervical and lumbar spine motion.” (R. 19 (citing R. 405-10)).

With respect to the non-medical evidence, the ALJ noted that: (i) in September 2015, Ms. Gray “admitted to exercising three-to-four times per week” (R. 20 (citing R. 271)); (ii) in November 2016, she “reported that she enjoyed travelling three times per year and exercising several times per week” and “admitted to a consultative examiner that she could cook, clean, wash laundry, shop, shower, and dress herself” (R. 20-21 (citing R. 212-19, 405-10)); (iii) in December 2016, Ms. Gray “reported that she could clean, shop, cook and prepare meals, wash laundry, perform general cleaning, and use public transportation” (R. 21 (citing R. 415)); and (iv) in February 2019, she “admitted that she was independent in dressing, feeding, grooming, and taking care of personal hygiene, and reported that she used the subway to travel[.]” R. 21 (citing R. 506)).

As to the medical opinions in the Record, ALJ Alger gave “partial” weight to the opinion of Allen Meisel, M.D., who performed a consultative examination of Ms. Gray on November 17, 2016. (R. 21; see R. 405-410)). Dr. Meisel opined, inter alia, that Ms. Gray “had mild limitations of standing, walking, climbing stairs, bending, and kneeling.” (R. 21 (citing R. 405-410)). The ALJ acknowledged that, “as Dr. Meisel only evaluated [Ms. Gray] on a single occasion, his opinions are of limited longitudinal value.” (R. 21). ALJ Alger concluded, however, that “Dr. Meisel's opinions are consistent with his own examination findings and [Ms. Gray]'s reported daily activities at that time.” (R. 21).

ALJ Alger also gave “partial” weight to statements of ...