Teresi v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec.

CASSIDY M. TERESI, Plaintiff, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant.

19-CV-1268 (JLC)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

August 31, 2020

OPINION AND ORDER

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. BACKGROUND ...................................................................................................... 1

A. Procedural Background ...................................................................................... 1

B. The Administrative Record ................................................................................. 3

1. Teresi's Background ........................................................................................ 3

2. Relevant Medical Evidence ............................................................................. 4

a. Treatment History ....................................................................................... 4

i. Adrienne Salomon, M.D.—Treating Neurologist .................................... 4

ii. Ruben Kuzniecky, M.D.—Psychiatrist .................................................... 6

b. Opinion Evidence ......................................................................................... 7

i. Adrienne Salomon, M.D.—Treating Neurologist .................................... 7

ii. Ruben Kuzniecky, M.D.— Psychiatrist ................................................... 7

iii. William Barr, M.D.—Consultative Expert .............................................. 8

iv. Arlene Broska, M.D.—Consultative Examiner ....................................... 9

v. L. Hoffman—State Agency Medical Consultant ................................... 10

vi. Rita Figueroa, M.D.—Consultative Examiner ...................................... 12

3. ALJ Hearing .................................................................................................. 13

II. DISCUSSION ....................................................................................................... 16

A. Legal Standards ................................................................................................ 16

1. Judicial Review of Commissioner's Determinations .................................... 16

2. Commissioner's Determination of Disability ............................................... 17

a. Five-Step Inquiry ....................................................................................... 18

b. Duty to Develop the Record ....................................................................... 19

c. Treating Physician's Rule .......................................................................... 21

d. Claimant's Credibility ................................................................................ 24

B. The ALJ's Decision ............................................................................................ 26

C. Analysis ............................................................................................................. 31

1. Lay Witness Testimony ................................................................................. 32

a. The ALJ Properly Evaluated Theresa's Testimony and Credibility ........ 33

b. The ALJ Properly Evaluated Teresi's Credibility .................................... 372. The ALJ Properly Evaluated the Opinion Evidence .................................... 40

a. Dr. Rita Figueroa ....................................................................................... 40

b. Dr. Arlene Broska ...................................................................................... 45

c. Dr. L. Hoffman ........................................................................................... 48

3. The ALJ Did Not Violate Her Duty to Develop the Record ......................... 49

a. Dr. Salomon ................................................................................................ 49

b. Dr. Kuzniecky ............................................................................................ 52

4. The Court Has No Jurisdiction Over the Prior ALJ Decision ..................... 54

III. CONCLUSION ..................................................................................................... 56

JAMES L. COTT, United States Magistrate Judge.

Plaintiff Cassidy M. Teresi seeks judicial review of a final determination by defendant Andrew M. Saul, the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration, denying Teresi's application for childhood disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income under the Social Security Act. The parties have cross-moved for judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Rule 12(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. For the reasons set forth below, Teresi's motion is denied and the Commissioner's cross-motion is granted.

I. BACKGROUND

A. Procedural Background

Teresi initially filed for Social Security Childhood Disability Benefits ("CDB") and Supplemental Security Income ("SSI") on September 24, 2012. See Administrative Record ("AR"), Dkt. No. 16, at 109.¹ She alleged that she has had epilepsy and a seizure disorder since she was born, August 11, 1994. Id. at 109, 245, 247, 280-81.² The claims were denied on January 15, 2013. Id. Administrative Law Judge ("ALJ") Dennis G. Katz held a hearing on March 12,2014 and issued an unfavorable decision on May 20, 2014. Id. at 106-25. A Notice of Decision with a copy of the decision was sent to Teresi on May 20, 2014. Id.

Thereafter, on May 8, 2015, Teresi filed a second application for CDB and SSI, alleging an onset date of May 8, 2015. Id. at 215-27.³ The Social Security Administration ("SSA") denied Teresi's claim on August 10, 2015. Id. at 126-39. On October 6, 2015, Teresi requested a hearing before an ALJ and, on June 9, 2017, Teresi appeared before ALJ Katherine Edgell via videoconference. Id. at 18, 36, 140-44, 212. Teresi did not have an attorney present and, after being informed of her right to have an attorney, decided to proceed with the hearing unrepresented. Id. at 36-44. Theresa Teresi (Teresi's mother) and Andrew Pasternak, a vocational expert, also testified at the hearing. Id. at 34. ALJ Edgell subsequently issued a decision dated March 15, 2018, in which she found that Teresi was not disabled. Id. at 18-28. On May 2, 2018, Teresi sought review of the ALJ's decision through the Appeals Council. Id. at 213-14. Her request was denied on December 13, 2018, rendering the ALJ's decision final. Id. at 2-7.

Teresi timely commenced the present action on February 10, 2019, seeking judicial review of the Commissioner's decision pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). Complaint, Dkt. No. 1. The Commissioner answered Teresi's complaint by filing the administrative record on June 24, 2019. AR, Dkt. No. 16. On August 22, 2019,Teresi moved for judgment on the pleadings seeking remand for further administrative proceedings and submitted a memorandum of law in support of her motion ("Pl. Mem."). Dkt. Nos. 17-18. The Commissioner cross-moved for judgment on the pleadings on November 20, 2019 and submitted a memorandum in support of his cross-motion ("Def. Mem."). Dkt. No. 21. Teresi filed her reply papers on November 27, 2019 ("Pl. Reply"). Dkt. No. 22.

B. The Administrative Record

1. Teresi's Background

Teresi was born on August 11, 1994. AR at 46. She was 19 years old on her alleged onset date of disability (May 21, 2014). Id. at 18, 215, 224. At the time of her hearing before ALJ Edgell, Teresi lived with her mother, Theresa Teresi ("Theresa"), in Otisville, New York. Id. at 45. She completed high school and took some classes in college before dropping out. Id. at 48. Since her alleged date of disability, Teresi worked as a sales associate at a retail store for three days, as a hostess at Ruby Tuesday's short-term but "more than a month," and occasionally as an attendant at a concession stand at Justice For All Productions. Id. at 48-50. She has not worked since March 2015. Id. at 245.

During the hearing, Teresi described the extent of her seizure disorder and the scope of her ability to function, perform daily tasks, and travel outside of her home. Id. at 47-56. Teresi reported being able to clean, do laundry, make her bed, and vacuum. Id. at 54. She also testified that she socializes with friends, goes bowling, watches movies, and enjoys social media. Id. at 55. In her function report,dated May 18, 2015, Teresi alleged that she cannot be alone, take baths, or use sharp knives or hot tools because she may have a seizure. Id. at 262-64. Teresi testified that she cannot work full-time because of her difficulty with math and performing simple tasks. Id. at 50. She also alleges she cannot work because of her seizure disorder, a brain tumor, and galactosemia. Id. at 245.⁴

2. Relevant Medical Evidence

a. Treatment History

i. Adrienne Salomon, M.D.—Treating Neurologist

Adrienne Salomon, M.D., is Teresi's treating neurologist for her seizure disorders, which are caused by her epilepsy. Id. at 50, 362-63, 531. Dr. Salomon treated Teresi beginning in December 2014 through at least April 19, 2017. On December 24, 2014, during an office visit with Dr. Salomon, Theresa reported that Teresi had four episodes of seizure over the previous two months but Teresi stated she did not remember these events. Id. at 370. Dr. Salomon performed a neurological examination and noted that the patient was "awake and alert," "[held] the attention to examiner throughout [the] entirety of [the] examination" and "[f]ollow[ed] multi-step instructions." Id. at 372. Dr. Salomon then sent Teresi for an MRI of her brain and an electroencephalography ("EEG") test. Id. at 373. The EEG results showed right-sided sharp waves that are "indicative of a seizuretendency" and that Teresi "may have had an electrographic seizure." Id. at 650. In a subsequent visit on January 7, 2015, Teresi's mother reported that Teresi was having two to three episodes of staring per week since her last visit. Id. at 367. As a result, Dr. Salomon scheduled additional testing for Teresi. Id. at 369. On February 4, 2015, Teresi's mother told Dr....