United States District Court, D. Colorado
RAYMOND A. TRUJILLO, Plaintiff,
v.
SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION,[1] Defendant.
ORDER VACATING AND REMANDING ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
JUDGE'S DENIAL OF BENEFITS
William J. Martínez, United States District Judge
This
Social Security benefits appeal is brought under 42 U.S.C.
§ 405(g). Plaintiff Raymond A. Trujillo
(“Plaintiff” or “Trujillo”)
challenges the final decision of Defendant, the Social
Security Administration (“Administration”),
denying his application for disability insurance benefits and
supplemental security income benefits (together
“benefits”). The denial was affirmed by an
administrative law judge (“ALJ”), who ruled that
Trujillo was not disabled within the meaning of the Social
Security Act. This appeal followed. For the reasons set forth
below, the ALJ's decision is vacated and remanded for
further proceedings consistent with this Order.
I.
BACKGROUND
Trujillo
was born in 1957, and was 54 years old on the alleged
disability onset date of January 1, 2012. (Administrative
Record (“R.”) (ECF No. 11) at 99.) Trujillo
served in the military from September 2, 1975 to August 31,
1979. (R. at 177, 184.) At various times, he worked as a
patient advocate, telemarketer, and user support analyst. (R.
at 48.) Trujillo also worked intermittently as a bouncer and
bartender, but, as the ALJ found, that work activity
“did not rise to the level of substantial gainful
activity.” (R. at 37, 43.)
Trujillo
filed applications for disability insurance benefits and
supplemental security income on April 22, 2014. (R. at 177,
184.) Plaintiff alleged that he is disabled due to the
following conditions: pain in both knees, diabetes, high
blood pressure, right shoulder pain, arthritis, and memory
loss. (R. at 99-100, 107-08.) His medical records also showed
degenerative joint disease in both knees and shoulders. (R.
at 102, 110.) Trujillo's applications for benefits were
initially denied on July 15, 2014. (R. at 118, 127.) He
requested and received a hearing before ALJ Matthew C.
Kawalek. (R. at 35, 136-37.) The hearing took place on
February 19, 2016. (R. at 54-96.) On March 21, 2016, the ALJ
issued a written decision in accordance with the
Administration's five-step sequential evaluation
process.[2]
At step
one, the ALJ found that Trujillo had not engaged in
substantial gainful activity since January 1, 2012. The ALJ
noted that Plaintiff did some work “on a far less than
full-time basis” after the alleged onset date, but that
the earnings associated with that work did not rise to the
level of substantial gainful activity. (R. at 37.) The ALJ
also stated that “this determination has no material
impact on the outcome of this decision.” (R. at 37.)
At step
two, the ALJ found that Trujillo had the following severe
impairments: “osteoarthritis of the bilateral
shoulders, osteoarthritis of the bilateral knees,
hepatitis-C, cirrhosis of the liver, and liver cancer.”
(R. at 38.) The ALJ also determined that no other claimed
conditions, including Trujillo's “generalized
anxiety disorder, diabetes, insomnia, peroneal tendonitis,
alcohol abuse, hypertension, cluster headaches, chronic pain,
and visual limitation, ” were a severe impairment.
(Id.)
At step
three, the ALJ found that Trujillo's impairments, while
severe, did not meet or medically equal the severity of any
of the “listed” impairments in the Social
Security regulations. (R. at 39.)
Before
proceeding to step four, the ALJ assessed Trujillo's
residual functional capacity (“RFC”). The ALJ
concluded that Trujillo has the RFC to perform light work:
[T]he claimant can occasionally lift, carry, push or pull 20
pounds at a time, and frequently lift, carry, push or pull
objects weighing up to 10 points. The claimant can stand and
walk for no more than about two hours during an eight-hour
workday, and the claimant must be permitted to use a cane to
stand or walk. The claimant can sit for approximately six
hours total during an eight-hour workday. The claimant can
never climb ropes, ladders, and scaffolding. The claimant can
occasionally climb ramps and stairs. The claimant can also
occasionally stoop, kneel, crouch, and crawl. The claimant
should have no more than occasional exposure [to] vibration
and no exposure to environmental hazards such as unprotected
heights and moving machinery.
(R. at 41.) In so concluding, the ALJ found that
Trujillo's “medically determinably impairments
could reasonably be expected to cause some of the alleged
symptoms; however [Trujillo's] statements concerning the
intensity, persistence and limiting effects of these symptoms
are not fully persuasive to the extent they are inconsistent
with the medical evidence of record.” (R. at 42.) Then,
at step four, the ALJ concluded that Trujillo was capable of
performing his past relevant work. (R. at 47.)
Accordingly,
the ALJ found that Trujillo was not entitled to disability
insurance benefits or supplement security income benefits
because he had not been under a disability from January 1,
2012 through the date of the ALJ's decision. (R. at 48.)
Trujillo appealed to the Social Security Appeals Council (R.
at 30), which denied review (R. at 7). Trujillo then filed
this action seeking review of the ALJ's March 21, 2016
decision. (ECF No. 1.)
II.
STANDARD OF REVIEW
The
Court reviews the Administration's decision to determine
whether substantial evidence in the record as a whole
supports the factual findings and whether the correct legal
standards were applied. Wall v. Astrue, 561 F.3d
1048, 1052 (10th Cir. 2009). Substantial evidence is the
amount of relevant evidence that a reasonable mind might
accept as adequate to support a conclusion. Id.
“It requires more than a scintilla, but less than a
preponderance.” Lax, 489 F.3d at 1084.
Evidence is not substantial if it is overwhelmed by other
evidence in the record. Grogan v. Barnhart, 399 F.3d
1257, 1261-62 (10th Cir. 2005). In reviewing the
Administration's decision, the Court may neither reweigh
the evidence nor substitute its judgment for that of the
agency. Salazar v. Barnhart, 468 F.3d 615, 621 (10th
Cir. ...