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.

Winfree v. Berryhill

United States District Court, M.D. Tennessee, Nashville Division

January 30, 2018

SHAUNTAI WINFREE
v.
NANCY A. BERRYHILL Acting Commissioner of Social Security[1]

          To The Honorable Waverly D. Crenshaw, Chief District Judge

          REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

          BARBARA D. HOLMES United States Magistrate Judge

         Plaintiff filed this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §§ 405(g) and 1383(c)(3) to obtain judicial review of the final decision of the Social Security Administration (“Commissioner”) denying Plaintiff's claim for a period of disability, Disability Insurance Benefits (“DIB”), and Supplemental Security Income (“SSI”) as provided under Title II and XVI of the Social Security Act (“the Act”). The case is currently pending on Plaintiff's motion for judgment on the administrative record (Docket Entry No. 10), to which Defendant has filed a response. Docket Entry No. 13.

         Upon review of the administrative record as a whole and consideration of the parties' filings, the undersigned respectfully recommends that Plaintiff's motion for judgment on the administrative record (Docket Entry No. 10) be DENIED.[2]

         I. INTRODUCTION

         Plaintiff filed an application for a period of disability, DIB, and SSI on April 20, 2011. See Transcript of the Administrative Record (Docket Entry No. 6) at 201-02.[3] She alleged a disability onset date of September 30, 2008. AR 201-02. Plaintiff asserted that she was unable to work because of asthma, a breathing condition, and back problems. AR 231.[4]

         Plaintiff's applications were denied initially and upon reconsideration. AR 201-04. Pursuant to her request for a hearing before an administrative law judge (“ALJ”), Plaintiff appeared and testified at a hearing before ALJ Scott C. Shimer on April 23, 2013. AR 152. The ALJ denied the claim on August 2, 2013. AR 136-38. The Appeals Council denied Plaintiff's request for review of the ALJ's decision on April 19, 2016 (AR 18-21), thereby making the ALJ's decision the final decision of the Commissioner. This civil action was thereafter timely filed, and the Court has jurisdiction. 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).

         II. THE ALJ FINDINGS

         The ALJ issued an unfavorable decision and made the following enumerated findings based upon the record:

1. The claimant is found to meet the insured status requirements of the Social Security Act through at least the date of this decision.
***
2. The claimant has not engaged in substantial gainful activity since March 26, 2011, the first date she can be found disabled (20 CFR 404.1571 et seq., and 416.971 et seq.).
***
3. The claimant has the following severe impairments: asthma, obesity, lumbar spondylosis, and bipolar disorder (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), 404.1525, 404.1526, 416.920(d), 416.925 and 416.926).
***
5. After careful consideration of the entire record, the undersigned finds that the claimant has the residual functional capacity to perform light work as defined in 20 CFR 404.1567(b) and 416.967(b) with occasional postural activities, and no exposure to pulmonary irritants or poor ventilation. She could perform simple routine tasks, could adjust to gradual and infrequent workplace changes, could not work around the general public, but could work around co-workers and supervisors on an occasional basis.
***
6. The claimant is capable of performing her past relevant work (20 CFR ...

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.