United States District Court, E.D. Kentucky, Central Division, Lexington
OPINION AND ORDER
K. CALDWELL, CHIEF JUDGE.
plaintiff Debbie Stamper brought this action pursuant to 42
U.S.C. § 405(g) to obtain judicial review of an
administrative decision denying her claim for disability
insurance benefits. The Court, having reviewed the record,
will affirm the Commissioner's decision.
AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
Court's review of the decision by the Administrative Law
Judge (“ALJ”) is limited to determining whether
it “is supported by substantial evidence and was made
pursuant to proper legal standards.” Rabbers v.
Comm'r Soc. Sec., 582 F.3d 647, 651 (6th Cir.2009).
denying Stamper's claim, the ALJ engaged in the five-step
sequential process set forth in the regulations under the
Social Security Act (the “Act”). 20 C.F.R. §
404.1520(a)-(e). See, e.g., Walters v. Comm'r of Soc.
Sec., 127 F.3d 525, 529 (6th Cir. 1997).
one, the ALJ determined that Stamper has not engaged in
substantial gainful activity since January 2, 2012, the
alleged onset date. (Administrative Record (“AR”)
two, the ALJ determined that Stamper suffers from the
following severe impairments: coronary artery disease with
status post double coronary artery bypass grafting;
fibromyalgia; back and shoulder pain; and Sjögren's
syndrome, which is an autoimmune disease that causes dryness
of the eyes and mouth.
(AR at 12.)
three, the ALJ found that Stamper did not have an impairment
or combination of impairments that meets or medically equals
the severity of one of the listed impairments. (AR at 16.)
proceeding to step four, the ALJ determined that Stamper had
the residual functional capacity (RFC) to perform a reduced
range of “light” work as defined by 20 C.F.R.
§§ 404.1567(b) with the following limitations:
She is unable to climb ropes, ladders and scaffolds. She is
limited to no more than frequent climbing ramps/stairs,
balancing, stooping and kneeling. She is restricted to tasks
with limited exposure to temper extremes, full body
vibration, concentrated wetness, hazardous machinery and
(AR at 16.)
four, the ALJ determined that, given the RFC described above,
Stamper can still perform her past relevant work as a real
estate salesperson and officer manager and, thus, she is not
disabled. (AR at 17.) Accordingly, the ALJ did not proceed to
step five - determining whether there are jobs the claimant
could perform other than past relevant work.
raises two objections to the ALJ's decision. First, she
argues that the ALJ erred in finding that Stamper's
impairment or combination of impairments does not meet or
medically equal the severity of one of the listed
impairments. This is significant because, if a claimant's
impairment meets or medically equals one of the listed
impairments at 20 C.F.R. § 440, ...