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.

Abegg v. Saul

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

July 30, 2019

MARY KATHRYN ABEGG, Plaintiff,
v.
ANDREW M. SAUL, Commissioner of the Social Security Administration, Defendant.

          OPINION AND ORDER

          JOHN E. MARTIN MAGISTRATE JUDGE

         This matter is before the Court on a Complaint [DE 1], filed by Plaintiff Mary Kathryn Abegg on May 2, 2018, and Plaintiff's Opening Brief [DE 15], filed September 27, 2018. Plaintiff requests that the decision of the Administrative Law Judge be reversed and remanded for further proceedings. On February 8, 2019, the Commissioner filed a response, and on February 18, 2019, Plaintiff filed a reply.

         I. Background

         On March 25, 2014, Plaintiff filed an application for benefits alleging that she became disabled on December 21, 2013. Plaintiff's application was denied initially and upon consideration. On February 3, 2017, Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) Kevin Plunkett held a video hearing, at which Plaintiff, with an attorney, and a vocational expert (“VE”) testified. On March 22, 2017, the ALJ issued a decision finding that Plaintiff was not disabled.

         The ALJ made the following findings under the required five-step analysis:

1. The claimant's date last insured is June 30, 2018.
2. The claimant has not engaged in substantial gainful activity since December 21, 2013, the alleged onset date.
3. The claimant has the following severe impairments: degenerative disc disease, fibromyalgia, ulnar neuropathy, and mitral valve prolapse.
4. 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 C.F.R. Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1.
5. The claimant has the residual functional capacity (“RFC”) to perform sedentary work as defined in 20 C.F.R. § 404.1567(a) except the claimant can frequently feel with the right upper extremity and occasionally feel with the left upper extremity. In addition, the claimant is limited to no climbing of ladders, ropes, or scaffolds and occasional climbing of ramps and stairs, and occasional stooping, kneeling, crouching, or crawling.
6. The claimant is capable of performing past relevant work as an accounting clerk. This work does not require the performance of work-related activities precluded by the claimant's residual functional capacity.
7. The claimant has not been under a disability, as defined in the Social Security Act, from December 21, 2013, through the date of this decision.

         The Appeals Council denied Plaintiff's request for review, leaving the ALJ's decision the final decision of the Commissioner.

         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 ...


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.