United States District Court, N.D. Indiana, Hammond Division
OPINION AND ORDER
E. MARTIN UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
matter is before the Court on a Complaint [DE 1], filed by
Plaintiff Roslinde Graham on March 16, 2016, and an Opening
Brief of Plaintiff in Social Security Appeal Pursuant to L.R.
7.3 [DE 17], filed by Plaintiff on August 25, 2016. Plaintiff
requests that the decision of the Administrative Law Judge be
reversed and remanded for further proceedings. On October 4,
2016, the Commissioner filed a response, and on December 13,
2016, Plaintiff filed a reply. For the following reasons, the
Court grants Plaintiff's request for remand.
March 2013, Plaintiff filed an application for benefits
alleging that she became disabled on June 30, 2010.
Plaintiff's application was denied initially and upon
reconsideration. On May 20, 2014, Administrative Law Judge
(“ALJ”) Janice M. Bruning held a video hearing at
which Plaintiff, with an attorney, and a vocational expert
(“VE”) testified. On August 8, 2014, the ALJ
issued a decision finding that Plaintiff was not disabled.
made the following findings under the required five-step
1. The claimant met the insured status requirements of the
Social Security Act through December 31, 2016.
2. The claimant has not engaged in substantial gainful
activity since June 30, 2010, the alleged onset date.
3. The claimant has severe impairments: combination of
obesity, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, dyslipidemia,
adjustment disorder, alcohol abuse and borderline
4. The claimant does not have an impairment or combination of
impairments that meets or medically equals the severity of
one the listed impairments in 20 CFR 404, Subpart P, Appendix
5. The claimant has the residual functional capacity
(“RFC”) to perform medium work as defined in 20
CFR 404.1567(c) and 416.967(c). However, claimant can never
climb ladders, ropes, or scaffolds and can perform postural
activities (i.e. climbing ramps/stairs, balancing, stooping,
kneeling, crouching, crawling, bending, twisting) only on an
occasional basis. She is to have no public contact and no
more than occasional contact with coworkers and supervisors.
Claimant is limited to 1 to 3-step simple repeated routine
6. The claimant is capable of performing past relevant work
as a housekeeper. This work does not require the performance
of work-related activities precluded by her RFC.
7. The claimant has not been under a disability, as defined
in the Social Security Act, from June 30, 2010, through the
date of the decision.
January 11, 2016, the Appeals Council denied Plaintiff's
request for review, leaving the ALJ's decision the final
decision of the Commissioner.
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. Therefore, this Court has jurisdiction to decide