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.

Holder v. Berryhill

United States District Court, E.D. Kentucky, Central Division, Lexington

March 9, 2018

DAVID M. HOLDER, Plaintiff,
v.
NANCY A. BERRYHILL, ACTING COMMISSIONER OF SSA, Defendant.

          OPINION AND ORDER

          KAREN K. CALDWELL, CHIEF JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT.

         The plaintiff David M. Holder brought this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) to obtain judicial review of an administrative decision denying his claim for disability insurance benefits. The Court, having reviewed the record, will affirm the Commissioner's decision.

         FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

         This 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).

         In denying Holder's, 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).

         At step one, the ALJ determined that Holder did not engage in substantial gainful activity between his initial onset date of December 23, 2008 and December 31, 2013, the date he was last insured. (Administrative Record (“AR”) at 21.)

         At step two, the ALJ determined that, during that time period, Holder suffered from the severe impairment of degenerative disc disease. (AR at 21.)

         At step three, the ALJ found that, during the relevant time period, Holder did not have an impairment or combination of impairments that met or medically equaled the severity of one of the listed impairments. (AR at 23.)

         Before proceeding to step four, the ALJ determined that, during the relevant time period, Holder had the residual functional capacity (RFC) to perform a limited range of “light” work as defined by 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1567(b) with the following limitations:

He could lift and or carry 20 pounds occasionally and 10 pounds frequently, stand and or walk six hours out of an eight-hour workday, and sit six hours out of an eight-hour workday. The claimant could frequently push and or pull with his left lower extremity and occasionally (a) crouch, and (b) climb a ladder or rope.

(AR at 23.)

         At step four, the ALJ determined that, given the RFC described above, Holder was not able to perform his past relevant work as an industrial truck operator. (AR at 26.)

         At step five, the ALJ determined that, considering the RFC described above and Holder's age, education, and work experience, during the relevant time period, there were jobs that existed in significant numbers in the national economy ...


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.