United States District Court, S.D. Ohio, Western Division, Dayton
WILLIAM T. BOWEN, Plaintiff,
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant.
H. Rice, District Judge
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION  THAT: (1) THE
ALJ'S NON-DISABILITY INDING BE FOUND UNSUPPORTED BY
SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE, AND REVERSED; (2) THIS MATTER BE
REMANDED TO THE COMMISSIONER UNDER THE FOURTH SENTENCE OF 42
U.S.C. § 405(g) FOR PROCEEDINGS CONSISTENT WITH THIS
OPINION; AND (3) THIS CASE BE CLOSED
Michael J. Newman United States Magistrate Judge
a Social Security disability benefits appeal. At issue is
whether the Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”)
erred in finding Plaintiff not “disabled” and
therefore unentitled to Disability Insurance Benefits
(“DIB”) and/or Supplemental Security Income
(“SSI”). This case is before the Court upon
Plaintiff's Statement of Errors (doc. 9), the
Commissioner's memorandum in opposition (doc. 10),
Plaintiff's reply memorandum (doc. 11), the
administrative record (doc. 7),  and the record as a whole.
filed for DIB and SSI alleging a disability onset date of
August 23, 2014. PageID 326-39. Plaintiff claims disability
as a result of a number of impairments including, inter
alia, ischemic heart disease, degenerative disc disease,
borderline intellectual functioning, dysthymic disorder and
somatoform disorder. PageID 88.
initial denial of his applications, Plaintiff received a
hearing before ALJ Eric Anschuetz on May 19, 2016. PageID
111-49. The ALJ issued a written decision on June 9, 2016
finding Plaintiff not disabled. PageID 85-103. Specifically,
the ALJ found at Step 5 that, based upon Plaintiff's
residual functional capacity (“RFC”) a reduced
range of medium work, “there are jobs in that exist in
significant numbers in the national economy that [Plaintiff]
can perform[.]” PageID 102-03.
the Appeals Council denied Plaintiff's request for
review, making the ALJ's non-disability finding the final
administrative decision of the Commissioner. PageID 60-63.
See Casey v. Sec'y of Health & Human Servs.,
987 F.2d 1230, 1233 (6th Cir. 1993). Plaintiff then filed
this timely appeal. Cook v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec.,
480 F.3d 432, 435 (6th Cir. 2007).
Evidence of Record
evidence of record is adequately summarized in the ALJ's
decision (PageID 85-103), Plaintiff's Statement of Errors
(doc. 9), the Commissioner's memorandum in opposition
(doc. 10), and Plaintiff's reply (doc. 11). The
undersigned incorporates all of the foregoing and sets forth
the facts relevant to this appeal herein.
Standard of Review
Court's inquiry on a Social Security appeal is to
determine (1) whether the ALJ's non-disability finding is
supported by substantial evidence, and (2) whether the ALJ
employed the correct legal criteria. 42 U.S.C. § 405(g);
Bowen v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec., 478 F.3d 742,
745-46 (6th Cir. 2007). In performing this review, the Court
must consider the record as a whole. Hephner v.
Mathews, 574 F.2d 359, 362 (6th Cir. 1978).
evidence is “such relevant evidence as a reasonable
mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion.”
Richardson v. Perales, 402 U.S. 389, 401 (1971).
When substantial evidence supports the ALJ's denial of
benefits, that finding must be affirmed, even if substantial
evidence also exists in the record upon which the ALJ could
have found Plaintiff disabled. Buxton v. Halter, 246
F.3d 762, 772 (6th Cir. 2001). Thus, the ALJ has a