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.

Perfater v. Commissioner, Social Security Administration

United States District Court, D. Colorado

January 17, 2019

ALFRED LEROY PERFATER, Plaintiff,
v.
COMMISSIONER, SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, Defendant.

          OPINION AND ORDER REVERSING THE COMMISSIONER'S DECISION

          MARCIA S. KRIEGER CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.

         THIS MATTER comes before the Court on the Plaintiff's Complaint (# 1), the Plaintiff's Opening Brief (# 14), the Defendant's Response (# 15), and the Plaintiff's Reply (# 18). For the following reasons, the Commissioner's decision is reversed and the matter is remanded for further proceedings.

         I. JURISDICTION

         The Court has jurisdiction over an appeal from a final decision of the Commissioner under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).

         II. BACKGROUND

         A. Procedural History

         Alfred Perfater seeks judicial review of a final decision by the Commissioner denying his claim for supplemental security income (SSI) under the Social Security Act. In January 2015, Mr. Perfater filed for SSI, claiming he became disabled in January 2012. Tr. at 192-200. His application was denied at all administrative levels and he now appeals to this Court.

         B. Factual Background

         The Court summarizes only the medical evidence relevant to its decision. Here, the dispositive issue concerns the weight given to the medical opinions as to Mr. Perfater's functional capacity. At the time of his alleged onset of disability, Mr. Perfater was 49 years old. Tr. at 192. He was previously employed as an auto mechanic. Tr. at 226.

         In April 2015, Physician's Assistant Michael Beer, a treating physician, completed a MED-9 form detailing Mr. Perfater's vocational limitations. The Court cannot find this form in the record, but there are contemporaneous treatment notes that summarize its contents:

MED-9 signed today for 12-month disability; given the limitations of pt's age, chronic pain, low education, no skilled job training, and cognitive and memory deficits, I do not believe he will ever be able to return to full-time employment as an auto mechanic in a high-pressure setting. With training and a structure[d] work environment, I believe he might safely work, but it would require a very special job setting with an employer committed to working around his limitations. Cannot safely work on ladders or at height above floor level.

Tr. at 409.

         In December 2016, Dr. John Mars, a consulting examiner, conducted an examination of Mr. Perfater and completed a medical source statement. Tr. at 354-59, 360-62. His clinical impression was that Mr. Perfater suffered from low back pain, hypertension, right shoulder pain, a history of double vision, diabetes, and depression and anxiety. Tr. at 362. Dr. Mars opined that, though Mr. Perfater has these problems, his physical exam was “mostly normal”. Tr. at 362. Based on his observations, Dr. Mars assessed the following with regard to Mr. Perfater's functional limitations: he can continuously lift and carry up to 50 pounds and frequently lift and carry up to 100 pounds; he can sit for two hours at one time without interruption and for eight hours in a workday; he can stand or walk four hours at a time and four hours each in a workday. Tr. at 354-55. Elaborating on his sitting/standing/walking assessment, Dr. Mars stated that nothing in the physical exam or the medical records would limit such activities. Tr. at 355.

         In January 2017, PA Beer partially completed a diabetes residual functional capacity questionnaire. Tr. at 363-66. He identified Mr. Perfater's symptoms: fatigue, extremity pain and numbness, difficulty walking, episodic vision blurriness, difficulty thinking and concentrating, psychological problems, headaches, cataracts, and astigmatism. Tr. at 363. He opined that Mr. Perfater is capable of low-stress jobs because he is physically and cognitively limited. Tr. at 364. For whatever reason, PA Beer did not complete any portion of the questionnaire that would specifically detail Mr. ...


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.