United States District Court, E.D. Kentucky, Southern Division, London
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
R. WILHOIT, JR. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
has brought this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §405(g) to
challenge a final decision of the Defendant denying
Plaintiffs application for supplemental security income
benefits. The Court having reviewed the record in this case
and the dispositive motions filed by the parties, finds that
the decision of the Administrative Law Judge is supported by
substantial evidence and should be affirmed.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
filed her current application for supplemental security
income benefits on August 26, 2014, alleging disability
beginning on December 8, 1993, due to chronic lymphocytic
leukemia stage 2, depression and bipolar disorder (Tr. 238).
This application was denied initially and on reconsideration.
Thereafter, upon request by Plaintiff, an administrative
hearing was conducted by Administrative Law Judge Jonathon
Stanley (hereinafter "ALJ"), wherein Plaintiff,
accompanied by counsel, testified. At the hearing, William J.
Braunig, a vocational expert (hereinafter "VE"),
hearing, pursuant to 20 C.F.R. § 416.920, the ALJ
performed the following five- step sequential analysis in
order to determine whether the Plaintiff was disabled:
Step 1: If the claimant is performing substantial gainful
work, he is not disabled.
Step 2: If the claimant is not performing substantial gainful
work, his impairment(s) must be severe before he can be found
to be disabled based upon the requirements in 20 C.F.R.
Step 3: If the claimant is not performing substantial gainful
work and has a severe impairment (or impairments) that has
lasted or is expected to last for a continuous period of at
least twelve months, and his impairments (or impairments)
meets or medically equals a listed impairment contained in
Appendix 1, Subpart P, Regulation No. 4, the claimant is
disabled without further inquiry.
Step 4: If the claimant's impairment (or impairments)
does not prevent him from doing his past relevant work, he is
Step 5: Even if the claimant's impairment or impairments
prevent him from performing his past relevant work, if other
work exists in significant numbers in the national economy
that accommodates his residual functional capacity and
vocational factors, he is not disabled.
issued a decision finding that Plaintiff was not disabled.
Plaintiff was 56 years old at the time of the hearing
decision. She has a 12th grade education (Tr.
239). She has no past relevant work as defined by 20 C.F.R.
1 of the sequential analysis, the ALJ found that Plaintiff
had not engaged in substantial gainful activity since the
date of her current application for disability i.
then determined, at Step 2, that Plaintiff suffers from
degenerative disc disease of the cervical, thoracic and
lumbar spine with history of pain / sciatica; chronic
lymphocytic leukemia; depressive disorder / mood disorder /
major depressive disorder; bipolar disorder and i The record
shows that Plaintiff collected SSI benefits from 1997 through
June 2012, when they were terminated because she went to
prison (Tr. 12). SSI is payable only as of the month after
the claimant files an application, see 20 C.F.R.
§ 416.335. anxiety disorder, which he found to be
"severe" within the meaning of the Regulations.
3, the ALJ found that Plaintiffs impairments did not meet or