Source: http://co.findacase.com/research/wfrmDocViewer.aspx/xq/fac.20180319_0000346.DCO.htm/qx
Timestamp: 2019-04-19 18:18:49+00:00

Document:
This matter is before the Court on review of the Social Security Commissioner's decision to deny Plaintiff Diane Martinez's application for disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income. Jurisdiction is proper under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).
Plaintiff argues that the administrative law judge's (“ALJ”) determination that Plaintiff was not disabled is erroneous because the ALJ improperly weighed various medical opinions and incorrectly assessed Plaintiff's credibility. (Doc. # 16.) For the reasons set forth below, the Court affirms the decision of the Commissioner to deny Plaintiff's application for disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income.
The standard of review in a Social Security appeal is whether the Commissioner's final decision is supported by substantial evidence and whether he applied the correct legal standards. Grogan v. Barnhart, 399 F.3d 1257, 1261 (10th Cir. 2005). Substantial evidence is more than a mere scintilla and is such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion. Id. at 1262. The district court is “not to reweigh the evidence or try the issues de novo” but should “meticulously examine the record as a whole, including anything that may undercut or detract from the ALJ's findings in order to determine if the substantiality test has been met.” Id. The court should determine if the substantiality test has been met, regardless of whether it would have reached a different result based on the record. Ellison v. Sullivan, 929 F.2d 534, 536 (10th Cir. 1990).
42 U.S.C. § 423(d)(2)(A). The claimant bears the burden of proving that she is disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1512(a); Wall v. Astrue, 561 F.3d 1048, 1062 (10th Cir. 2009).
A finding that a claimant is or is not disabled at any point in the five-step evaluation process is conclusive and terminates the analysis. Casias v. Sec'y of Health & Human Serv., 933 F.2d 799, 801 (10th Cir. 1991).

References: § 405
 v. 
 v. 
 § 423
 § 404
 v. 
 v.