United States District Court, M.D. Tennessee, Nashville Division
WAVERLY D. CRENSHAW, JR. CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
before the Court is Laura Ann Collier's Motion for
Judgment on the Administrative Record (“Motion”)
(Doc. No. 14), filed with a Memorandum in Support (Doc. No.
14-1). The Commissioner of Social Security
(“Commissioner”) filed a Response in Opposition
to Plaintiff's Motion (Doc. No. 17), to which Plaintiff
replied (Doc. No. 18). On July 24, 2014, this case was
referred to a Magistrate Judge. (Doc. No. 3.) The Court
hereby withdraws that referral. In addition, upon
consideration of the parties' filings and the transcript
of the administrative record (Doc. No. 10),  and for the
reasons stated herein, the Court denies Plaintiff's
Motion (Doc. No. 14).
filed an application for Disability Insurance Benefits
(“DIB”) under Title II of the Social Security Act
and Supplemental Security Income (“SSI”) under
Title XVI of the Act on June 14, 2011, alleging a disability
onset of June 1, 2008. (Tr. 11.) Collier's claim was
denied at the initial and reconsideration stages of state
agency review. (Tr. 56, 62.) Collier subsequently requested
de novo review of this case by an Administrative Law
Judge (“ALJ”). The ALJ heard the case on March
22, 2013, when Collier appeared with counsel and gave
testimony. (Tr. 36-51.) Testimony was also received from an
impartial vocational expert. At the conclusion of the
hearing, the matter was taken under advisement until April
26, 2013, when the ALJ issued a written decision finding
Collier not disabled. (Tr. 8-23.) That decision contains the
following enumerated findings:
1. The claimant met the insured status requirements of the
Social Security Act through December 31, 2012.
2. The claimant has not engaged in substantial gainful
activity since June 1, 2008, the alleged onset date (20
C.F.R. 404.1571 et seq., and 416.971 et
3. The claimant has the following severe impairment: bipolar
disorder (20 C.F.R. 404.1520(c) and 416.920(c)).
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 (20 C.F.R. 404.1520(d), 404.1525, 404.1526,
416.920(d), 416.925 and 416.926).
5. After careful consideration of the entire record, …
the claimant has the residual functional capacity to perform
a full range of work at all exertional levels but with the
following nonexertional limitations: she could understand,
remember, and carry out simple instructions, could perform
routine tasks on a sustained basis with minimal to normal
supervision, could work with co-workers, but would work
better with minimal social interaction and with
non-confrontational supervisors, and could adjust to
infrequent changes at work.
6. The claimant is unable to perform past relevant work.
7. The claimant is a younger individual (20 C.F.R. 404.1563
8. The claimant has at least a high school education and
attended two years of college (20 C.F.R. 404.1564 and
9. Transferability of job skill is not an issue because of
the claimant's young age.
10. 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 (20 C.F.R. 404.1596,
404.1569(a), 416.969, and 416.969(a)).
11. The claimant has not been under a disability, as defined
in the Social Security Act, from June 1, 2008, through the
date of this decision (20 C.F.R. 404.1520(g) and 416.920(g)).
12. The claimant's subjective complaints have been
evaluated as required under the applicable regulations and
(Tr. 13-14, 17-18.)
16, 2014, the Appeals Council denied Collier's request
for review of the ALJ's decision (Tr. 1-5), thereby
rendering that decision the final decision of the SSA. This
civil action was thereafter ...