United States District Court, E.D. Kentucky, Southern Division
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
R. WILHOIT J.R. 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 disability insurance 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 disability insurance
benefits in January 2015, alleging disability beginning on
October 27, 2014, due to cervical radiculopathy, spinal
stenosis, degeneration of cervical intervertebral discs,
degeneration of thoracic and lumbar interverbal discs, lumbar
radiculopathy, sacroiliitis, fibromyalgia, multilevel
degenerative disc disease, multiple pinched nerve in c-spine
and 1-spine and cervicalgia (Tr. 258). This application was
denied initially and on reconsideration. Thereafter, upon
request by Plaintiff, an administrative video hearing was
conducted by Administrative Law Judge Anthony Johnson, Jr.
(hereinafter "ALJ"), wherein Plaintiff, accompanied
by counsel, testified. At the hearing, George D. Moore, a
vocational expert (hereinafter "VE"), also
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 46 years old at her alleged onset of
disability. She has a 12th grade education and her
past relevant work experience consists of work as a food
service supervisor and convenience store manager.
1 of the sequential analysis, the ALJ found that Plaintiff
had not engaged in substantial gainful activity since the
alleged onset date of disability.
then determined, at Step 2, that Plaintiff suffers from
degenerative disc disease of the lumbar and cervical spine,
sacroiliitis, and myofascial pain syndrome, which he found to
be "severe" within the meaning of the Regulations.
3, the ALJ found that Plaintiffs impairments did not meet or
medically equal any of the listed impairments. In doing so,