United States District Court, E.D. Tennessee, Chattanooga
CHRISTOPHER H. STEGER, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.
action was instituted pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §§
405(g) and 1383(c)(3) seeking judicial review of the
Commissioner's final decision denying Maureen
Nickol's (“Plaintiff”) claim for Disability
Insurance Benefits (“DIB”) and Supplemental
Security Income (“SSI”), as provided by the
Social Security Act.
parties have consented to entry of final judgment by the
United States Magistrate Judge under the provisions of 28
U.S.C. § 636(c), with any appeal to the Court of Appeals
for the Sixth Circuit [Doc. 26]. Pending before the Court is
Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. 30]. The
Court will consider Plaintiff's “Brief in Support
of the Claimaint” [sic] [Doc. 29], in which she
requests reversal or remand of the Commissioner's
decision, as her dispositive motion in this matter.
reasons stated herein, the Court AFFIRMS the
Commissioner's decision. Accordingly, the Court
DENIES Plaintiff's motion [Doc. 29] and
GRANTS Defendant's motion [Doc. 30].
October 25, 2011, and April 19, 2013, Plaintiff protectively
filed for DIB and SSI under Titles II and XVI of the Social
Security Act (“Act”), 42 U.S.C. § 401 et
seq. and 42 U.S.C. § 1381 et seq., based
on panic attacks, depression, chronic joint pain, severe
menopause symptoms, endometriosis, and
pyelonephritis [Tr. 11, 108-109, 125]. Plaintiff's
claim was denied initially and on reconsideration [Tr. 54-55,
57-60, 62-64]. On February 27, 2014, Plaintiff appeared and
testified at a hearing before Administrative Law Judge
(“ALJ”) Ronald Feibus [Tr. 27-46]. On March 27,
2014, the ALJ issued a decision finding that Plaintiff was
“not disabled, ” as defined in the applicable
sections of the Act, because work existed in the national
economy that she could still perform [Tr. 11-19]. On July 8,
2014, the Appeals Council denied Plaintiff's request for
review [Tr. 1-3]. Thus, Plaintiff has exhausted her
administrative remedies, and the ALJ's decision stands as
the Commissioner's final decision subject to judicial
review. See 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).
Age, Education, and Past Work Experience
is currently a fifty-one-year-old individual who performed
past relevant work as a help desk analyst and computer
support technician [Tr. 31-32, 40-41, 131, 153-160]. At the
time of her alleged onset date of September 14, 2010,
Plaintiff was forty-four years old [Tr. 108].
Testimony and Medical History
parties and the ALJ have summarized and discussed the medical
and testimonial evidence of the administrative record.
Accordingly, the Court will discuss those matters as relevant
to the analysis of the parties' arguments.
considering the entire record, the ALJ made the following
1. The claimant meets the insured status requirements of the
Social Security Act through December 31, 2015.
2. The claimant has not engaged in substantial gainful
activity since September 14, 2010, the alleged onset date (20
CFR 404.1571, et seq., and 416.971 et
3. The claimant has the following severe impairments:
depression; anxiety (20 CFR 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 CFR Part 404, Subpart P,
Appendix 1 (20 CFR 404.1520(d), ...