Barrera v. Commissioner of Social Security

Summary

These Findings and Recommendations address Abel Barrera’s challenge to the Commissioner of Social Security’s denial of supplemental security income. The magistrate judge recommends denying Barrera’s motion for summary judgment, granting the Commissioner’s cross-motion, affirming the Commissioner’s decision, and directing entry of judgment for the Commissioner. The recommendations conclude that the ALJ’s step-five findings, record development, and evaluation of subjective complaints were supported by substantial evidence and applicable law.

Holdings

1. Any apparent conflict between the RFC limitation to simple work and the mail-clerk position's Reasoning Level 3 was harmless because the vocational expert also identified two Reasoning Level 2 jobs—photocopy machine operator and office clerk—that were compatible with simple work.
2. The ALJ did not err by declining to obtain a consultative physical examination or an additional examining-source RFC opinion because plaintiff failed to explain what evidence or functional limitations would require further development.
3. Plaintiff failed to establish a basis for remand on the subjective-symptom issue because he did not identify, summarize, or cite the testimony or complaints allegedly rejected by the ALJ, nor did he identify the limitations that the testimony would support.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the vocational-expert testimony concerning the identified jobs conflicted with the RFC limitation to simple instructions and simple work-related decisions.
2. Whether the ALJ erred by declining to obtain an examining-source physical RFC opinion or consultative orthopedic examination.
3. Whether the ALJ improperly evaluated plaintiff's subjective symptom complaints.

Disposition

other