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.

Galochkin v. Berryhill

United States District Court, D. Kansas

November 16, 2017

VLADIMIR GALOCHKIN, Plaintiff,
v.
NANCY A. BERRYHILL, ACTING COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant.

          MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

          CARLOS MURGUIA United States District Judge

         Plaintiff Vladimir Galochkin filed this action pursuant to Title II of the Social Security Act (“Act”), 42 U.S.C. §§ 401 et seq., requesting disability benefits. Plaintiff claims that he became disabled on October 27, 2012. He suffers from spondylosis/degenerative disc disease and depression. The administrative law judge (“ALJ”) reviewing plaintiff's case found that plaintiff had these medically determinable impairments, but that they did not constitute severe impairments. The ALJ therefore found that plaintiff was not disabled, and the ALJ's decision stands as the final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security. Plaintiff argues that the ALJ erred in several ways: (1) he failed to determine plaintiff's residual functional capacity (“RFC”); (2) he failed to consider plaintiff's age as a vocational barrier; and (3) he improperly weighed the opinion of a non-treating, non-examining physician over plaintiff's treating physician. After reviewing the record, the court makes the following rulings.

         I. Legal Standard

         This court applies a two-pronged review to the ALJ's decision: (1) Are the factual findings supported by substantial evidence in the record? (2) Did the ALJ apply the correct legal standards? Lax v. Astrue, 489 F.3d 1080, 1084 (10th Cir. 2007) (citation omitted). “Substantial evidence” is a term of art. It means “more than a mere scintilla” and “‘such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion.'” Hunter v. Astrue, 321 F. App'x 789, 792 (10th Cir. 2009) (quoting Flaherty v. Astrue, 515 F.3d 1067, 1070 (10th Cir. 2007)). When evaluating whether the standard has been met, the court is limited; it may not reweigh the evidence or replace the ALJ's judgment with its own. Bellamy v. Massanari, 29 F. App'x 567, 569 (10th Cir. 2002) (citing Kelley v. Chater, 62 F.3d 335, 337 (10th Cir. 1995)). On the other hand, the court must examine the entire record-including any evidence that may detract from the decision of the ALJ. Jaramillo v. Massanari, 21 F. App'x 792, 794 (10th Cir. 2001) (citing Glenn v. Shalala, 21 F.3d 983, 984 (10th Cir. 1994)).

         Plaintiff bears the burden of proving disability. Hunter, 321 F. App'x at 792. A disability requires an impairment-physical or mental-that causes one to be unable to engage in any substantial gainful activity. Id. (quoting Barnhart v. Walton, 535 U.S. 212, 217 (2002)). Impairment, as defined under 42 U.S.C. § 423(d)(1)(A), is a “medically determinable physical or mental impairment which can be expected to result in death or which has lasted or can be expected to last for a continuous period of not less than 12 months.”

         The ALJ uses a five-step sequential process to evaluate disability claims. Williams v. Bowen, 844 F.2d 748, 750 (10th Cir. 1988) (citation omitted). But the ALJ may stop once he makes a disability determination; he does not need to continue through subsequent steps if he is able to find a claimant disabled or not disabled at an intermediate step. Id.

         The components of the five-step process are:

. Step One: The plaintiff must demonstrate that he is not engaged in substantial gainful employment activity. Id. If the plaintiff meets this burden, then the ALJ moves to Step Two.
. Step Two: The plaintiff must demonstrate that he has a “medically severe impairment or combination of impairments” that severely limits his ability to do work. Id. (internal quotation omitted).
o If the plaintiffs impairments have no more than a minimal effect on his ability to do work, then the ALJ can make a nondisability determination at this step.
o If the plaintiff makes a sufficient showing that his impairments are more than minimal, then the ALJ moves to Step Three.
. Step Three: The ALJ compares the impairment to the “listed impairments”-impairments that the Secretary of Health and Human Services recognizes as severe enough to preclude substantial gainful activity. Id. . at 751.
o If the impairment(s) match one on the list, then the ALJ makes a disability finding. Id.
o If an impairment is not listed, the ALJ moves to Step Four of the ...

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.