Valdez v. Colvin

232 F.Supp.3d 543

Carmen VALDEZ, Plaintiff,

v.Carolyn W. COLVIN, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant.

16 Civ. 292 (GWG)

United States District Court, S.D. New York.

Signed February 3, 2017

Joseph Albert Romano, Law Offices of Joseph A. Romano, Bronx, NY, for Plaintiff.

Leslie A. Ramirez–Fisher, United States Attorney's Office Southern District of New York, New York, NY, for Defendant.

OPINION AND ORDER

GABRIEL W. GORENSTEIN, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Plaintiff Carmen Valdez brings this action to review the final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security finding that Valdez is not disabled and thus not eligible for Social Security benefits. The Commissioner moves for judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(c).¹ Valdez has moved for summary judgment under Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(a).² The parties have consented to this matter being determined by a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). For the reasons stated below, the Commissioner's motion for judgment on the pleadings is granted and Valdez's motion for summary judgment is denied.

I. BACKGROUND

A. Procedural History

Valdez applied for Disability Insurance Benefits and Supplemental Security Income on June 14, 2012. See Administrative Record, filed Apr. 25, 2016 (Docket # 13) ("R."), at 256–66. The Social Security Administration ("SSA") denied Valdez's application on October 4, 2012. R. 120. Valdez requested a hearing on this decision before an Administrative Law Judge ("ALJ"). R. 129. Valdez's first hearing was held on December 13, 2013. R. 80–111. Because a vocational expert was not present, see R. 109–10, a supplemental hearing took place on April 4, 2014, R. 58–79. In a May 28, 2014, ruling, the ALJ found that Valdez was not disabled. R. 51–52. Valdez requested review of the ALJ's decision and the Appeals Council denied that request on November 27, 2015, making the ALJ's determination the Commissioner's final decision. R. 1–4.

B. The Hearings Before the ALJ

Valdez testified that she lived alone in an apartment in Yonkers, New York. R. 84–85. Valdez was born in the Dominican Republic and came to the United States on July 4, 1990. R. 61, 85. At the time of the hearing, she was 37 years old, five feet, four inches tall, and weighed 170 pounds. R. 85. She is right handed. R. 85–86. Valdez completed a ninth-grade education in the United States, but cannot read and write beyond identifying information such as her name, address, and social security number. See R. 61–62, 87.

Valdez worked part time as a grocery stocker beginning February 1, 2008. See R. 89–90, 93, 100–01. Working as a stocker involved lifting heavy items to put them on store shelves. See R. 64–65, 90–91. Valdez also returned items to the shelves and checked the store for expired items. R. 65–69, 89. On July 21, 2013, she injured her back lifting heavy products. See R. 90–91, 99. At some point before her workplace injury, Valdez had been out of work for 10 months because of a shoulder infection caused by an injection.³ R. 91–92. Before working in the grocery store, in 2007, Valdez worked at a McDonald's restaurant cooking and "do[ing] the dishes," but not waiting on customers. R. 92–93. Prior to 2007, Valdez did not work and received support from her husband's disability income. R. 71–72.

Valdez testified that "[e]verything" hurt "[h]alf of the time" and that she was "in pain 24/7." R. 93. According to her testimony, her back hurt, as well as her legs and left shoulder. Id. At the time of the hearing, Valdez was receiving therapy for her shoulder problems as well as taking medicine. R. 94. Valdez took muscle relaxants, asthma medicine, and something for migraine headaches. Id. She also took medicine for depression. See id. When Valdez was depressed, the only thing she would do is remain in a dark room alone, take pills, and sleep. See R. 104. Before the hearing, however, Valdez was able to travel to New Jersey from her home to receive medical treatment. See R. 105.

Valdez said she stayed "up all night," and that she could not sleep well "because [of] the pain." R. 95. She was able to wash and dress herself in the morning, but could not sit down for long periods of time because of the pain. See R. 96. She did not want to do anything as a result of the pain and all she could do was stay in bed "half of the time." See id. Valdez received aid from family or friends once a month to help her get groceries and bring them back to her home, because "she cannot carry" anything. Id. Once a week, Valdez's neighbor or Valdez's aunt would help clean Valdez's apartment. R. 97. Valdez was able to dress herself. Id. She took public transit to go to her doctor's appointments. R. 98. She used a cane that was given to her by "St. John's." Id. By Valdez's own estimation, the heaviest thing she could carry was her purse, the longest she could stay standing was five minutes, and the longest she could remain seated was between 15 and 20 minutes. R. 98–99.

Valdez testified that she went to the hospital on September 27, 2013, due to pain from an ovary problem. R. 101. She was in the hospital for five days. R. 102. In October 2013, Valdez went to the hospital due to her asthma, because of the pain in her ovaries, and/or as a result of gastritis. See R. 102–03. Valdez was also in the hospital for her shoulder in 2012. R. 103.

At a supplemental hearing held after the initial examination of Valdez, the ALJ questioned a vocational expert ("VE"). R. 60. The VE classified Valdez's previous work as that of a stock clerk in a grocery store, with a Dictionary of Occupational Titles ("DOT") number of 299.367–014, with an "SVP" of 4.⁴ R. 73–74. The VE said this was a semi-skilled job at the "medium range." R. 74.

Among the hypothetical questions posed to the VE was one that concerned someone with Valdez's unskilled work profile, who could lift 10 pounds frequently—and heavier weights of 20 pounds occasionally—with the ability to only occasionally lift, reach, push, pull, or perform overhead work with her left side, and who needed to avoid "concentrated respiratory irritants." See R. 74. The ALJ asked the VE if such a person could perform any jobs. Id. The VE testified that such a person could find available jobs, and identified three such jobs: ticket taker, housekeeping cleaner, and small products assembler. R. 74–75.⁵

C. Medical Evidence

The Commissioner has provided a summary of the medical evidence contained in the administrative record. See Def. Mem. at 4–17. Plaintiff has not objected to the summary, as had been required by the Court to the extent she had objections. See Scheduling Order, filed Apr. 27, 2016 (Docket # 14), ¶ 5. Accordingly, the Court adopts the Commissioner's summary as accurate and complete for purposes of the issues raised in this suit. We discuss the medical evidence pertinent to the adjudication of this case in section III below.

D. The ALJ's Decision

The ALJ denied Valdez's application for benefits on May 28, 2014. R. 39–52. The ALJ found that Valdez had several severe impairments, including "chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), gastrointestinal reflux disease (GERD), gastritis, cervical disc disease, cervical sprain, lumbar radiculopathy [,] and depression." R. 41. However, the ALJ found that Valdez did not have any impairments that corresponded to listings 1.00 or 3.00 of 20 C.F.R. Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1 for these impairments. R. 42. Thus, the ALJ found neither Valdez's musculoskeletal nor her respiratory impairments severe enough to constitute a regulatory disability. See id. The ALJ also found "no objective documentation of marked restrictions" related to mental disorders under listing 12.00 of 20 C.F.R. Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1. Id.

The ALJ found that Valdez had "the residual functional capacity to perform light work," as long as it was unskilled, involved only occasional lifting, reaching, pushing, pulling, and overhead work with her upper left side, and allowed her to avoid frequent concentrated exposure to respiratory irritants. R. 43. Because of Valdez's impairments, the ALJ found that Valdez could not perform any past relevant work. R. 50. However, the ALJ found that, based on Valdez's age, education, work experience, and residual functional capacity, jobs existed in "significant numbers in the national economy" that Valdez could perform. Id. For these reasons, the ALJ found Valdez was not disabled, as defined by the Social Security Act, from June 9, 2012, to the date of the decision. R. 51. Finding no disability, the ALJ denied Valdez's applications for Disability Insurance Benefits and Supplemental Security Income. R. 51–52.

II. GOVERNING STANDARDS OF LAW

A. Scope of Judicial Review Under 42 U.S.C. §§ 405(g) and 1383(c)

A court reviewing a final decision by the Commissioner "is limited to determining whether the [Commissioner's] conclusions were supported by substantial evidence in the record and were based on a correct legal standard." Selian v. Astrue , 708 F.3d 409, 417 (2d Cir. 2013) (per curiam) (internal quotation marks omitted) (quoting Talavera v. Astrue , 697 F.3d 145, 151 (2d Cir. 2012) ); accord Burgess v. Astrue , 537 F.3d 117, 127 (2d Cir. 2008) (citation omitted); see also 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) ("The findings of the Commissioner of Social Security as to any fact, if supported by substantial evidence, shall be conclusive ...."); id. § 1383(c)(3) ("The final determination of the Commissioner of Social Security ... shall be subject to judicial review as provided in section 405(g)...."). Substantial evidence is "more than a mere scintilla. It means such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion." Richardson v. Perales , 402 U.S. 389, 401, 91 S.Ct. 1420, 28 L.Ed.2d 842 (1971) (internal quotation marks omitted) (quoting Consol. Edison Co. of N.Y. v. NLRB , 305 U.S. 197, 229, 59 S.Ct. 206, 83 L.Ed. 126 (1938) ); accord Selian , 708 F.3d at 417 ; Brault v. Soc. Sec. Admin., Comm'r , 683...