Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Warren v. Colvin

United States District Court, N.D. Indiana, Hammond Division

September 15, 2016

VINCE O. WARREN, Plaintiff,
v.
CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting Commissioner of the Social Security Administration, Defendant.

          OPINION AND ORDER

          PAUL R. CHERRY MAGISTRATE JUDGE

         This matter is before the Court on a Complaint [DE 1], filed by Plaintiff Vince O. Warren on July 2, 2015, and a Brief in Support of Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment [DE 13], filed by Plaintiff on November 2, 2015. Plaintiff requests that the February 7, 2014 decision of the Administrative Law Judge denying his claim for supplemental security income be reversed and remanded for further proceedings. On February 5, 2016, the Commissioner filed a response, and Plaintiff filed a reply on February 24, 2016. For the following reasons, the Court grants Plaintiff's request for remand.

         BACKGROUND

         Plaintiff filed for supplemental security income on November 13, 2012. His claim was denied initially and upon reconsideration. Plaintiff timely requested a hearing, which was held on January 27, 2014, and presided over by Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) Christa Zamora. Present at the hearing were Plaintiff, his attorney, and an impartial vocational expert.

         The ALJ issued a written decision on February 7, 2014, concluding that Plaintiff was not disabled based on the following findings:

1. The claimant has not engaged in substantial gainful activity since November 13, 2012, the application date.
2. The claimant has the following severe impairment[s]: degenerative joint disease of the lumbar spine, degenerative joint disease of the pelvis/right hip, and chronic pain syndrome.
3. The claimant does 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.
4. After careful consideration of the entire record, the undersigned finds that the claimant has the residual functional capacity to perform light work as defined in 20 CFR 416.967(b) with some additional limitations. More specifically, he is able to lift and/or carry up to 20 pounds occasionally and 10 pounds frequently, stand and/or walk for a total of about six hours in an eight-hour workday, and sit for a total of about six hours in an eight-hour workday. He is further limited to no more than occasional balancing, stooping, kneeling, crouching, crawling, and climbing.
5. The claimant has no past relevant work.
6. The claimant was born [in 1988] and was 23 years old, which is defined as a younger individual age 18-49, on the date the application was filed.
7. The claimant has at least a high school education and is able to communicate in English.
8. Transferability of job skills is not an issue because the claimant does not have past relevant work.
9. Considering the claimant's age, education, work experience, and residual functional capacity, there are jobs that exist in significant numbers in the national economy that the claimant can perform.
10. The claimant has not been under a disability, as defined in the Social Security Act, since November 13, 2012, the date the application was filed.

(AR 1-23). Plaintiff then sought review before the Agency's Appeals Council, which denied his request on May 18, 2015, leaving the ALJ's decision as the final decision of the Commissioner. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.1481. On July 2, 2015, Plaintiff filed this civil action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1383(c)(3) for review of the Agency's decision.

         The parties filed forms of consent to have this case assigned to a United States Magistrate Judge to conduct all further proceedings and to order the entry of a final judgment in this case. This Court thus has jurisdiction to decide this case pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) and 42 U.S.C. § 1383(c)(3).

         STANDARD ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.