Wayne P. M. v. Commissioner of Social Security

No. 5:24-CV-01268 (ML) (N.D.N.Y. Mar. 27, 2026) · United States District Court for the Northern District of New York · March 27, 2026 · No. 5:24-CV-01268 (ML)

Summary

The United States District Court for the Northern District of New York affirmed the Commissioner of Social Security’s denial of Wayne P. M.’s application for Supplemental Security Income benefits. The court held that substantial evidence supported the ALJ’s conclusion that the plaintiff’s migraines and headaches were not a medically determinable primary headache disorder under SSR 19-4p, and that any error in the step-two analysis was harmless. Plaintiff’s motion for judgment on the pleadings was denied, the Commissioner’s motion was granted, and the complaint was dismissed.

Court
United States District Court for the Northern District of New York
Writing for the Court
Miroslav Lovric
Jurisdiction
United States District Court for the Northern District of New York
Decision date
March 27, 2026
Docket number
5:24-CV-01268 (ML)
Procedural posture
Action under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) seeking judicial review of the Commissioner's final decision denying Supplemental Security Income benefits; both parties moved for judgment on the pleadings.
Standard of review
The court reviewed whether the Commissioner applied the correct legal standards and whether the decision was supported by substantial evidence. The court reviewed the entire administrative record, including evidence detracting from the ALJ's conclusion, but could not substitute its own interpretation for the Commissioner's when substantial evidence supported the decision.
Precedential value
unpublished
Parties
Wayne P. M. v. Commissioner of Social Security
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

judicial review of agency actionadministrative lawdisability definitionadministrative procedure act

Practice areas

Social Security disabilityadministrative lawjudicial review of agency action

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the ALJ erred at step two by determining that Plaintiff's migraines and headaches were not a medically determinable primary headache disorder under SSR 19-4p.
  2. Whether the ALJ's residual functional capacity assessment was unsupported because it did not include limitations specifically attributable to Plaintiff's migraines and headaches.
  3. Whether the Commissioner's final disability determination was supported by substantial evidence and applied the correct legal standards.

Holdings

  1. The ALJ reasonably determined that Plaintiff did not have a medically determinable primary headache disorder during any relevant 12-month period because the record lacked the required objective medical evidence and supported the conclusion that the headaches were secondary to epilepsy or another condition.
  2. The absence of migraine- or headache-specific limitations in the RFC did not require remand because the ALJ had substantial evidence for finding that the headaches were not a medically determinable impairment and also considered the headache symptoms in evaluating Plaintiff's epilepsy.
  3. The Commissioner's decision was supported by substantial evidence and applied the correct legal standards.

Key quotations

A reviewing court may not affirm the ALJ’s decision if it reasonably doubts whether the proper legal standards were applied, even if the decision appears to be supported by substantial evidence. (Section II.A)
While imaging may be useful in ruling out other possible causes of headache symptoms, it is not required for a primary headache disorder diagnosis. (Section III)
Because the ALJ had substantial evidence to support his finding that Plaintiff’s migraines and headaches were not an MDI, he was not obligated to take those impairments into account in the RFC. (Section III)

Factual background

Plaintiff alleged disability beginning October 3, 2012 based in part on migraines and headaches occurring several times per week with dizziness, vision problems, nausea, and pain. He also had epilepsy, a learning disorder, and depressive disorder, and had worked in fast food, hospital housekeeping, warehousing, and retail stocking. The record contained a one-month headache log, generally unremarkable neurological examinations, reports that headaches were controlled with medication, and evidence that headache symptoms overlapped with Plaintiff's epilepsy and seizure symptoms.

Procedural history

Plaintiff applied for SSI benefits alleging disability from a learning disability, epilepsy, migraines, and depression. The application was denied initially and on reconsideration. After a hearing, the ALJ issued an unfavorable decision, and the Appeals Council denied review, making the ALJ's decision final. The district court denied Plaintiff's motion, granted the Commissioner's motion, affirmed the denial of benefits, and dismissed the Complaint.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…