Summary
The United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas reviews L.Y.’s challenge to the denial of disability insurance benefits under Title II of the Social Security Act. The court holds that substantial evidence supports the Administrative Law Judge’s determination that L.Y. did not satisfy Listing 1.15, including the requirement of a medically documented need for an assistive device for a continuous period of at least 12 months, and affirms the Commissioner’s decision.
Holdings
- The ALJ's determination that L.Y.'s impairments did not meet or medically equal Listing 1.15 was supported by substantial evidence.
Questions Presented
- Whether substantial evidence supported the ALJ's Step 3 determination that L.Y.'s impairments did not meet or medically equal Listing 1.15.
- Whether the record established the Listing 1.15, subpart D requirement of a medically necessary assistive device for a continuous period of at least twelve months.
Disposition
affirmed
Cases Cited (9)
- Waters v. Barnhart, 276 F.3d 716, 718 (5th Cir. 2002)(followed)
- Estate of Morris v. Shalala, 207 F.3d 744, 745 (5th Cir. 2000)(followed)
- Ramirez v. Colvin, 606 F. App'x 775, 777 (5th Cir. 2015)(followed)
- SEC v. Chenery Corp., 332 U.S. 194, 196 (1947)(followed)
- Anthony v. Sullivan, 954 F.2d 289, 293 (5th Cir. 1992)(followed)
- Salmond v. Berryhill, 892 F.3d 812, 817 (5th Cir. 2018)(followed)
- Kneeland v. Berryhill, 850 F.3d 749, 753-54 (5th Cir. 2017)(followed)
- Jones v. O'Malley, 107 F.4th 489, 493, 498 (5th Cir. 2024)(followed)
- Breoade V. v. Commissioner, Social Security Administration, No. 3:25-cv-254, 2026 WL 673837, at *5 (N.D. Tex. Mar. 6, 2026)(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…