Source: http://ks.findacase.com/research/wfrmDocViewer.aspx/xq/fac.20180531_0000799.DKS.htm/qx
Timestamp: 2019-04-25 18:10:45+00:00

Document:
This is an action reviewing the final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security denying plaintiff disability insurance benefits. The matter has been fully briefed by the parties and the court is prepared to rule. (Docs. 17, 23, 26.) The decision is REVERSED and REMANDED for the reasons set forth herein.
The Commissioner has established a five-step sequential evaluation process to determine disability. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520; Wilson v. Astrue, 602 F.3d 1136, 1139 (10th Cir. 2010). If at any step a finding of disability or non-disability can be made, the Commissioner will not review the claim further. At step one, the agency will find non-disability unless the claimant can show that he or she is not working at a “substantial gainful activity.” Williams v. Bowen, 844 F.2d 748, 750 (10th Cir. 1988). At step two, the agency will find non-disability unless the claimant shows that he or she has a severe impairment. At step three, the agency determines whether the impairment which enabled the claimant to survive step two is on the list of impairments presumed severe enough to render one disabled. Id. at 750-51. If the claimant's impairment does not meet or equal a listed impairment, the agency determines the claimant's residual functional capacity (“RFC”). 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(e). The RFC assessment is used to evaluate the claim at both step four and step five. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)(4); 404.1520(f, g). At step four, the agency must determine whether the claimant can perform previous work. If a claimant shows that she cannot perform the previous work, the fifth and final step requires the agency to consider vocational factors (the claimant's age, education, and past work experience) and to determine whether the claimant is capable of performing other jobs existing in significant numbers in the national economy. Barnhart v. Thomas, 124 S.Ct. 376, 379-380 (2003).
In evaluating Plaintiff's RFC, the ALJ considered the evidence from the hearing, the medical records, and the opinions of the state agency consultants. With respect to Plaintiff's testimony, the ALJ determined her testimony was not fully credible but that the impairments required a reduction of the RFC. (R. at 25.) However, the ALJ did lend some weight to Plaintiff's testimony. Notably, the state psychological consultant found that Plaintiff did not have any mental health impairments and determined that there were no limitations in any of the criteria of the listings, including difficulties in maintaining concentration, persistence or pace. The ALJ afforded the opinion of the psychological consultant “limited weight as evidence submitted at the hearing level indicates she is more limited than determined by the agency consultants.” (R. at 25.) Plaintiff's testimony, that was considered by the ALJ with respect to her mental health, included the following: “she has ‘fibro fog';” “her medications make her tired and she does not care about anything;” “she has memory problems and loses her train of thought;” and “at times, she is afraid to leave the house.” (R. at 21.) The RFC does not specifically refer to any work limitation related to Plaintiff's mental health impairments.
At step five, the ALJ determined that there are jobs that exist in significant numbers in the national economy that Plaintiff can perform given her age, education, work experience and RFC. Plaintiff has sufficiently exhausted her administrative remedies prior to filing this action.
Plaintiff asserts two errors by the ALJ in this matter. First, Plaintiff contends that the ALJ erred in failing to provide a detailed RFC assessment as it does not account for Plaintiff's mental limitations. Second, Plaintiff argues that there is a conflict between the testimony of the vocational expert and the Dictionary of Occupational Titles (“DOT”) that was not resolved by the ALJ. The court will address the arguments in turn.

References: § 404
 v. 
 v. 
 § 404
 § 404
 v.