United States District Court, E.D. Kentucky, Southern Division, London
OPINION AND ORDER
K. CALDWELL, CHIEF JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
matter is before the Court for consideration of cross-motions
for summary judgment filed by Plaintiff Charles Glenn
Sizemore and Defendant Commissioner of Social Security. (DE
11 & 13.) Sizemore brought this action under Section
405(g) of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. § 405(g),
to obtain judicial review of the final decision of the Social
Security Administration (“Commissioner”) denying
his claim for Disability Insurance Benefits
(“DIB”) and Supplemental Security Income
(“SSI”), as provided under Titles II and XVI of
the Social Security Act (“the Act”). The Court,
having reviewed the record, will affirm the
Commissioner's decision, as it is supported by
substantial evidence and was decided by the proper legal
OVERVIEW OF THE PROCESS
determine whether a claimant has a compensable disability
under the Social Security Act, the administrative law judge
(“ALJ”) applies a five-step sequential process.
20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(1), (4); see also Miller v.
Comm'r of Soc. Sec., 81 F.3d 825, 835 n.6 (6th Cir.
2016) (describing the five-step evaluation process). The five
steps, in summary, are:
Step 1: If the claimant is doing substantial gainful
activity, the claimant is not disabled.
Step 2: If the claimant does not have a severe
medically determinable physical or mental impairment-i.e., an
impairment that significantly limits his or her physical or
mental ability to do basic work activities-the claimant is
Step 3: If the claimant is not doing substantial
gainful activity and is suffering from a severe impairment
that has lasted or is expected to last for a continuous
period of at least twelve months, and his or her impairment
meets or equals a listed impairment, the claimant is presumed
disabled without further inquiry.
Step 4: If the claimant's impairment does not
prevent him or her from doing his or her past relevant work,
the claimant is not disabled.
Step 5: If the claimant can make an adjustment to
other work, the claimant is not disabled. If the claimant
cannot make an adjustment to other work, the claimant is
v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec., 656 Fed.App'x. 162, 169
(6th Cir. 2016) (citing Rabbers v. Comm'r Soc. Sec.
Admin., 582 F.3d 647, 652 (6th Cir. 2009)).
any step in the process, the ALJ concludes that the claimant
is or is not disabled, the ALJ can then complete the
“determination or decision and [the ALJ] do[es] not go
on to the next step.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4).
In the first four steps of the process the claimant bears the
burden of proof. Sorrell, 656 Fed.App'x. at 169
(quoting Jones v. Comm'r of Soc.
336 F.3d 469, 474 (6th Cir. 2003)). If the claim proceeds to
step five, however, “the burden shifts to the
Commissioner to identify a significant number of jobs in the
economy that accommodate the claimant's residual
functional capacity . . . and vocational profile.”
Id. (internal citations omitted); 20 C.F.R. §
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND