Benjamin R. v. Frank Bisignano, Commissioner of Social Security

Summary

This document is a Report and Recommendation from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California concerning a pro se plaintiff’s appeal of the Commissioner of Social Security’s denial of disability insurance benefits. The magistrate judge recommends affirming the denial, concluding that the ALJ’s findings regarding diabetic retinopathy, the residual functional capacity, and other challenged opinions were supported by substantial evidence and that remand for consideration of new evidence was unwarranted.

Holdings

1. A sentence-six remand requires new evidence that is material to determining disability and good cause for failing to submit it during the prior administrative proceeding. Plaintiff's proffered evidence did not satisfy those requirements.
2. Substantial evidence supported the ALJ's finding that Plaintiff's diabetic retinopathy was not a severe impairment.
3. The ALJ's RFC limitation to simple, routine tasks and simple work-related decisions adequately accounted for the moderate limitations in concentration, persistence, and pace identified by Dr. Shertock.
4. Substantial evidence supported the ALJ's rejection of the proposed restrictions on Plaintiff's driving.
5. The ALJ gave a specific, clear, and convincing reason supported by substantial evidence for discounting Plaintiff's statements concerning his inability or unwillingness to drive.
6. Substantial evidence supported the ALJ's finding that Dr. Campbell's opinion was only partially persuasive.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the ALJ erred by finding Plaintiff's diabetic retinopathy non-severe.
2. Whether the ALJ's residual functional capacity assessment adequately incorporated Dr. Shertock's moderate limitations in concentration, persistence, and pace and ability to withstand an eight-hour workday.
3. Whether substantial evidence supported the ALJ's rejection of driving restrictions assessed by a state-agency medical consultant and Dr. Tran.
4. Whether the ALJ provided specific, clear, and convincing reasons for discounting Plaintiff's subjective statements concerning his inability or unwillingness to drive.
5. Whether the ALJ properly evaluated Dr. Campbell's medical opinion.
6. Whether Plaintiff was entitled to a sentence-six remand for consideration of evidence outside the certified administrative record.

Disposition

other