Nicki J. v. Frank Bisignano, Commissioner of Social Security

Summary

A Report and Recommendation from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Alabama addressing judicial review of the denial of the plaintiff’s applications for Supplemental Security Income and Disability Insurance Benefits. The magistrate judge recommends denying the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment, granting the Commissioner’s motion, and affirming the Commissioner’s decision. The recommendation concludes that the RFC omission was harmless and that the ALJ adequately evaluated the plaintiff’s subjective complaints and hearing testimony.

Holdings

1. Any error in omitting the adapting-and-managing limitation from the written RFC was harmless because the ALJ included a limitation to gradual and infrequent changes in the work setting in the hypothetical presented to the vocational expert, and relied on the resulting testimony in finding that Plaintiff could perform jobs existing in significant numbers in the national economy.
2. The ALJ was not required to specifically cite Plaintiff's hearing testimony, so long as the decision showed that the ALJ considered Plaintiff's subjective symptoms, made an explicit credibility determination, and provided adequate reasons supported by the record.
3. The Commissioner's decision should be affirmed because it was supported by substantial evidence and was in accordance with applicable law.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the ALJ erred by omitting from the RFC an expressly stated limitation in adapting and managing oneself.
2. Whether the ALJ erred by failing to specifically discuss Plaintiff's sworn hearing testimony when evaluating her subjective symptoms and functional limitations.
3. Whether the Commissioner's decision was supported by substantial evidence and applied the correct legal standards.

Disposition

affirmed