United States District Court, W.D. Tennessee, Eastern Division
ORDER AFFIRMING THE DECISION OF THE
DANIEL BREEN SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
the Court is the Social Security action of the Plaintiff,
Teresa Gayle Jones, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g),
seeking judicial review of the final decision of the Acting
Commissioner of Social Security denying her claim for
disability insurance benefits (“DIB”).
April 12, 2010, she applied for disability and DIB alleging
disability as of July 23, 2009.
subsequently amended her onset date to May 13, 2010. The
claim was denied initially and upon reconsideration.
Following a hearing, Administrative Law Judge
(“ALJ”) K. Barlow denied her claim on January 6,
2012. Plaintiff's request for review of the ALJ's
decision was denied by the Appeals Council on March 23, 2013,
and this action was commenced two months later. Before the
Court is the Plaintiff's first motion for judgment on the
pleadings. (Docket Entry (“D.E.”) 10.)
heard testimony from the Plaintiff and from Nancy Newbell
Hughes, a vocational expert (“VE”). Jones had an
eighth grade education and past work as a cook, cashier,
stocker and machine operator. She also acted as caregiver to
her disabled husband. Plaintiff told the ALJ she was unable
to work because she could not tolerate being around other
people. On an average day, Jones helped her mother get her
handicapped brother up, prepared her husband's meals and
spent the remainder of the day watching television. She
reported mood swings, memory problems and anxiety. Plaintiff
also suffered from deep vein thrombosis (“DVT”)
in her left leg, for which she underwent surgery shortly
before the hearing.
characterized Jones's previous relevant jobs as requiring
medium and light levels of exertion. She opined that,
assuming simple routine tasks, no exposure to the public, and
occasional changes in the work environment, Plaintiff could
perform jobs in the economy, including conveyor offbearer,
floor waxer and box truck washer.
hearing testimony and reviewing the evidence, the ALJ made
the following findings:
1. The claimant last met the insured status requirements of
the Social Security Act on June 30, 2011.
2. The claimant did not engage in substantial gainful
activity during the period from her amended alleged onset
date of May 13, 2010 through her date last insured of June
30, 2011 (20 CFR 404.1571 et seq).
3. Through the date last insured, the claimant had the
following severe impairments: history of deep vein
thrombosis, major depressive disorder and adjustment disorder
with depression and anxiety. (20 CFR 404.1520(c)).
4. Through the date last insured, the claimant did not have
an impairment or combination of impairments that met or
medically equaled the severity of one of the listed
impairments in 20 CFR Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1 (20 CFR
404.1520(d), 404.1525 and 404.1526).
5. After careful consideration of the entire record, the
undersigned finds that, through the date last insured, the
claimant had the residual functional capacity to perform
medium work as defined in 20 CFR 404.1567(c)except that she
needs simple, routine tasks with no exposure to the public
and only occasional changes in the work environment.
6. Through the date last insured, the claimant was unable to
perform any past relevant work (20 CFR 404.1565).
7. The claimant was born on October 22, 1964 and was 46 years
old, which is defined as a younger individual age 18-49, on
the date last insured (20 CFR 404.1563).
8. The claimant has a limited education and is able to
communicate in English (20 CFR 404.1564).
9. Transferability of job skills is not material to the
determination of disability because using the
Medical-Vocational Rules as a framework supports a finding
that the claimant is “not disabled, ” whether or
not the claimant has transferable job skills (See SSR 82-41
and 20 CFR Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 2).
10. Through the dated [sic] last insured, considering the
claimant's age, education, work experience, and residual
functional capacity, there were jobs that existed in
significant numbers in the national economy that the claimant
could have performed (20 CFR 404.1569 and 404.1569(a)).
11. The claimant was not under a disability, as defined in
the Social Security Act, at any time from May 13, 2010, the
alleged onset date, through June 30, 2011, the date last
insured (20 CFR 404.1520(g)).
(Administrative Record (“AR”) 14-23.)