United States District Court, N.D. Indiana, Hammond Division
OPINION AND ORDER
E. MARTIN MAGISTRATE JUDGE
matter is before the Court on a Complaint [DE 1], filed by
Plaintiff Mary Beth Vandergraff on January 12, 2017, and
Brief of Plaintiff [DE 30], filed by Plaintiff on December
11, 2017. Plaintiff requests that the decision of the
Administrative Law Judge be reversed and remanded for further
proceedings. On February 9, 2018, the Commissioner filed a
response, and on February 22, 2018, Plaintiff filed a reply.
For the following reasons, the Court grants Plaintiff's
request for remand.
January 25, 2013, Plaintiff filed an application for benefits
alleging that she became disabled on September 26, 2011.
Plaintiff's application was denied initially and upon
reconsideration. On December 30, 2014, Administrative Law
Judge (“ALJ”) TheodoreW. Grippo held a video
hearing at which Plaintiff, with an attorney, and a
vocational expert (“VE”) testified. On August 25,
2015, the ALJ issued a decision finding that Plaintiff was
made the following findings under the required five-step
1. The claimant met the insured status of the Social Security
Act through December 31, 2017.
2. The claimant has not engaged in substantial gainful
activity since her alleged onset date of September 26, 2011.
3. The claimant has severe impairments of fibromyalgia and
chronic fatigue syndrome (“CFS”).
4. The claimant does not have an impairment or combination of
impairments that meet or medically equal the severity of one
the listed impairments in 20 CFR 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1.
5. The claimant had the residual functional capacity to
perform light work, where the claimant can lift or carry 20
pounds occasionally and 10 pounds frequently, stand or walk
for six hours in an eight-hour workday, and sit for 6 hours
in an 8-hour workday. The claimant can never climb ladders,
ropes, or scaffolds.
6. The claimant is able to perform past relevant work as an
administrative assistant, customer service manager, customer
service representative, office manager, and warehouse
manager. This work does not require the performance of
work-related activities precluded by the claimant's RFC.
7. The claimant was not under a disability, as defined in the
Social Security Act, from September 26, 2011, through the
date of the ALJ's decision.
Appeals Council denied Plaintiff's request for review,
leaving the ALJ's decision the final decision of 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. Therefore, this Court has jurisdiction to decide