Martinez v. Kijakazi

1

ROSA MARIA MARTINEZ, Plaintiff, v. KILOLO KIJAKAZI, Defendant.

No. 22 Civ. 9215 (GHW) (GWG)

United States District Court, S.D. New York

December 4, 2023

REPORT & RECOMMENDATION

GABRIEL W. GORENSTEIN, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Plaintiff Rosa Maria Martinez brought this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C §§ 405(g) and 1383(c)(3) to obtain judicial review of the June 28, 2022 decision of the Commissioner of Social Security (“Commissioner”) denying her application for Disability Insurance Benefits (“DIB”) and Supplemental Security Income (“SSI”) under the Social Security Act (“Act”). Both parties have moved for judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P 12(c).^[1] For the reasons that follow Martinez's motion should be denied, and the Commissioner's cross-motion should be granted.

I. BACKGROUND

A. Procedural History

In March 2016, Martinez filed for DIB, alleging that she was disabled as of February 1, 2014, due to joint pain, hypothyroidism, and osteoarthritis. SSA Admin. Record, filed Feb. 6, 2023 (Docket # 14) (“R.”), at 229, 277. On April 22, 2016, Martinez's application was denied, R. 127, and on August 1, 2016, Martinez requested a hearing before an Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”), R. 135. Martinez testified before an ALJ at a hearing on April 24, 2018, R. 88, and on August 1, 2018, the ALJ issued a decision finding that Martinez was not disabled and, therefore, not entitled to DIB or SSI, R. 12-27. On September 26, 2018, Martinez requested a review of the ALJ decision, R. 225, and on May 30, 2019, the Appeals Council denied Martinez's request for appeal, R. 1.

On July 30, 2019, Martinez filed an action in the Eastern District of New York seeking review of the Commissioner's decision. R. 575. On January 13, 2020, the Eastern District issued a stipulated order remanding Martinez's case to the SSA for further proceedings. R. 57980. On December 15, 2020, and again on November 18, 2021, Martinez appeared before a new ALJ for further hearings. R. 507, 541. On June 28, 2022, the ALJ issued a decision in which he found that Martinez was not disabled. R. 477. On October 27, 2022, Martinez filed the instant action challenging the ALJ's decision. Complaint, filed Oct. 27, 2022 (Docket # 1) (“Compl.”).

B. The Hearings Before the ALJ

Martinez appeared without representation at the April 24, 2018 hearing before the ALJ, which was held by video. See R. 15, 90. Also present and testifying was vocational expert (“VE”) Janice Hastert. R. 89. In brief, Martinez testified that she suffered from joint pain in her knees, shoulders, neck, and lower back, R. 94, that she had difficulty lifting her arms and bending down, R. 96-97, and had recurring ankle problems, R. 98. She testified that she took care of her son, including dressing, feeding, and bathing him, and was able to cook, clean, and do laundry, albeit with pain and dizziness. R. 100. She testified that she did her own shopping and went to some social events. R. 101. The VE testified that Martinez could work as a surveillance systems monitor, credit checker, or document preparer. R. 104.

At the December 15, 2020 hearing, which followed the remand, Martinez appeared with counsel and testified via telephone. See R. 509. She testified that she continued to suffer from back, neck, shoulder, and knee pain, and was receiving physical therapy. R. 514. Medications did not alleviate her pain, and she had stopped taking them. R. 518. She couldn't “stand for long, walk, and . . . lift [her] shoulder up,” and was “losing [her] balance” due to knee issues. R. 520. She could walk for two minutes at a time, and used a cane “several times a week” since 2017. R. 521-22. She could sit for two minutes at a time before experiencing back pain, and longer when using a heating pad. R. 522-23. Two days a week, she experienced such severe pain that she couldn't get out of bed “at all.” R. 523-24. Her brother and neighbor helped her care for her son, R. 527, and her brother came to her home “every day” to cook, clean, and do laundry. R. 528. She does not drive or use public transit. R. 530.

At the November 18, 2021 hearing, VE Marian Marracco testified via telephone. R. 543. She was asked questions regarding “a hypothetical individual who was born on January 25, 1978, [who] has at least a high school education .... [and] the residual functional capacity (RFC) to perform sedentary work as defined in 20 CFR 404.1567(a) and 416.967(a) except the individual cannot work on ladders, ropes or scaffolds; can occasionally use ramps and stairs; can occasionally balance, stoop, crouch, crawl, and kneel; cannot reach overhead but can frequently reach, handle, and finger in all other directions; cannot work indoors in a temperature controlled environment without exposure to extreme heat or cold, but would be able to work in a temperature setting similar to what one would typically expect in an office environment; must avoid vibrating machinery, and cannot work at unprotected heights or around dangerous machinery, which would include machinery encompassing open flames, exposed blades or moving parts.” R. 764; see R. 550-51 (adopting written statement). The VE testified that such a person could perform the unskilled occupations of document preparer, customer service clerk, or food & beverage order clerk. R. 765. This would be the case even if the hypothetical individual “required the use of a one handed cane for ambulation.” R. 766. Although the Dictionary of Occupational Titles (“DOT”) “does not address the use of any assistive device,” the VE's answer was “based on [her] professional credentials and given in [her] opinion.” Id. At the hearing, the VE testified that the DOT “does not address overhead reaching,” but based on her experience and professional credentials, she believed the same jobs would be available to a person who could not perform overhead reaching. R. 553.

C. The Medical Evidence

Both Aponte and the Commissioner have provided detailed summaries of the medical evidence. See Martinez Mem. at 3-10; Comm'r Mem. at 4-5. The Court directed the parties to specify any objections they had to the opposing party's summary of the record. See Scheduling Order, dated February 7, 2023 (Docket # 15). Neither party has done so. Accordingly, we adopt the parties' summaries of the medical evidence as accurate and complete for the purposes of the issues raised in this suit. We discuss the medical evidence pertinent to the adjudication of the instant case in Section III below.

D. The ALJ's Decision

The ALJ denied Martinez's application following the remand on June 28, 2022. R. 477-506. In doing so, he determined that Martinez “ha[d] not been under a disability, as defined in the Social Security Act, from February 1, 2014, through the date of [the] decision.” R. 496.

Following the five-step test set forth in the Social Security Administration (“SSA”) regulations, the ALJ found that Martinez “[met] the insured status requirements of the Social Security Act through September 30, 2018,” and “ha[d] not engaged in substantial gainful activity since February 1, 2014, the alleged onset date.” R. 484. At step two, the ALJ found that Martinez “ha[d] the following severe impairments: degenerative disc disease of the lumbar and cervical spine; degenerative joint disease of the bilateral knees, bilateral shoulders, and bilateral hips; seronegative arthritis; and obesity.” Id. The ALJ found that although there was evidence that Martinez had been treated or tested for hypothyroidism, right ankle tendonitis, and fibromyalgia, none of these ailments rose to the level of a severe impairment. See id. At step three, the ALJ found that Martinez “d[id] not have an impairment or combination of impairments that meets or medically equals the severity of one of the listed impairments in 20 CFR Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1.” R. 485.

Before moving on to step four, the ALJ assessed Martinez's residual functional capacity (“RFC”) for the relevant period. R. 486. The ALJ found that Martinez had the capacity “to perform sedentary work as defined in 20 CFR 404.1567(a) and 416.967(a) except she cannot work on ladders, ropes or scaffolds; can occasionally use ramps and stairs; occasionally balance, stoop, crouch, crawl, and kneel; cannot reach overhead, but can frequently reach, handle, and finger in all other directions bilaterally; cannot work indoors in a temperature controlled environment without exposure to extreme heat or cold, but would be able to work in a temperature setting similar to what one would typically expect in an office environment; must avoid vibrating machinery, and cannot work at unprotected heights or around dangerous machinery, which would include machinery encompassing open flames, exposed blades or moving parts.” Id.

In making this RFC finding, the ALJ “considered all symptoms and the extent to which these symptoms [could] reasonably be accepted as consistent with the objective medical evidence and other evidence,” and “considered opinion evidence in accordance with the requirements of 20 CFR 404.1527 and 416.927.” R. 486-87. The ALJ specifically considered imaging studies of Martinez's cervical spine, lumbar spine, hips, shoulders, and knees, R. 48889, caregiver notes from physical examinations, R. 489-91, and the opinions of medical consultants Dr. Greenfield and Dr. Healy, as well as Physician Assistant Mihei, R. 492-93.

The ALJ gave Dr. Greenfield's determination that Martinez had “mild limitation in ability to squat and to abduct the shoulders” little weight in light of the remaining medical evidence in the record. R. 492. The ALJ gave little weight to Dr. Healy's determinations that Martinez could sit only for “4 hours in an 8-hour workday,” finding that the conclusion was “not supported...