Ann Hartline, O/B/O K.H. v. Frank Bisignano, Commissioner of Social Security

Summary

The United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina reviewed the denial of supplemental security income benefits sought on behalf of a minor claimant. The court held that the Administrative Law Judge applied the correct legal standards and that substantial evidence supported the finding that the claimant did not have a marked limitation in attending and completing tasks. The court granted the Commissioner’s motion, denied the appeal, and affirmed the Commissioner’s decision.

Holdings

1. The ALJ's finding was supported by substantial evidence because the record contained evidence that K.H. completed assignments, participated in class, asked questions, had largely low-average scores in relevant neuropsychological measures, received conservative treatment, and performed daily activities inconsistent with a marked limitation.
2. The court did not reach the acquiring-and-using-information domain because Plaintiff did not allege an extreme limitation and therefore challenged only whether the two domains had marked limitations.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the ALJ erred by finding that K.H. had less than a marked limitation in the domain of attending and completing tasks.
2. Whether the Commissioner's denial of supplemental security income was supported by substantial evidence and applied the correct legal standards.

Disposition

affirmed