Baker v. Social Security Administration

United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas · March 19, 2025 · No. 4:24-cv-00512-BRW-JJV

Summary

This document is a proposed findings and recommended disposition by a United States Magistrate Judge in the Eastern District of Arkansas reviewing a Social Security Administration denial of disability insurance benefits. The court applies the substantial evidence standard to evaluate whether the Administrative Law Judge properly assessed the plaintiff's mental impairments and subjective symptom testimony. After analyzing the medical record and vocational evidence, the magistrate recommends affirming the Commissioner's final decision and dismissing the plaintiff's complaint with prejudice.

Court
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas
Writing for the Court
Joe Unites Fates
Jurisdiction
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas
Decision date
March 19, 2025
Docket number
4:24-cv-00512-BRW-JJV
Procedural posture
Plaintiff appealed the final decision of the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration denying disability benefits; the district court reviewed the ALJ's decision for substantial evidence.
Standard of review
substantial evidence
Precedential value
non-precedential
Parties
Benny Gibson Baker v. Social Security Administration
Disposition
dismissed

Topics

administrative lawjudicial review of agency actionada / disability

Practice areas

administrative lawdisability law

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the ALJ's finding that Plaintiff's impairments are non‑severe is supported by substantial evidence.
  2. Whether the Commissioner erred in denying Plaintiff disability benefits.

Holdings

  1. The ALJ's decision is supported by substantial evidence; the complaint is dismissed.

Key quotations

The test is whether there is substantial evidence on the record as a whole which supports the decision of the ALJ.

Factual background

Plaintiff Benny Gibson Baker, age 54, with an eighth‑grade education and a work history as a production‑lead welder, suffers from severe physical impairments (brain tumor, surgery, vascular disorder, diabetes, obesity, headaches) and mental impairments (depressive disorder, schizophrenia, anxiety, PTSD, borderline intellectual functioning). The ALJ found his impairments non‑severe and concluded he could perform other jobs in the national economy.

Procedural history

The Administrative Law Judge found Plaintiff not disabled and the Appeals Council denied review, making the Commissioner’s decision final. Plaintiff filed a complaint in the Eastern District of Arkansas seeking judicial review.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…