Source: http://in.findacase.com/research/wfrmDocViewer.aspx/xq/fac.20180313_0000336.SIN.htm/qx
Timestamp: 2019-04-22 22:21:47+00:00

Document:
Mr. Crozier applied on January 21, 2013, for Disability Insurance Benefits (DIB) under Title II of the Social Security Act, alleging that he has been disabled since January 1, 2011. Acting for the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration following a hearing on March 16, 2015, an administrative law judge (ALJ) found that Mr. Crozier is not disabled. The Appeals Council denied review of the ALJ's decision on November 1, 2016, rendering the ALJ's decision for the Commissioner final. Mr. Crozier timely filed this civil action under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for review of the Commissioner's decision. For the reasons set forth below, this court REVERSES and REMANDS the Commissioner's decision.
To prove disability, a claimant must show he is unable to “engage in any substantial gainful activity by reason of any medically determinable physical or mental impairment which can be expected to result in death or which has lasted or can be expected to last for a continuous period of not less than twelve months.” 42 U.S.C. § 423(d)(1)(A). Mr. Crozier is disabled if his impairments are of such severity that he is not able to perform the work he previously engaged in and, if based on his age, education, and work experience, he cannot engage in any other kind of substantial gainful work that exists in significant numbers in the national economy. 42 U.S.C. § 423(d)(2)(A). The Social Security Administration (SSA) has implemented these statutory standards by, in part, prescribing a five-step sequential evaluation process for determining disability. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520.
Step one asks if the claimant is currently engaged in substantial gainful activity; if he is, then he is not disabled. Step two asks whether the claimant's impairments, singly or in combination, are severe; if they are not, then he is not disabled. A severe impairment is one that “significantly limits [a claimant's] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c). The third step is an analysis of whether the claimant's impairments, either singly or in combination, meet or medically equal the criteria of any of the conditions in the Listing of Impairments, 20 C.F.R. Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1. The Listing of Impairments includes medical conditions defined by criteria that the SSA has predetermined are disabling, so that if a claimant meets all of the criteria for a listed impairment or presents medical findings equal in severity to the criteria for the most similar listed impairment, then the claimant is presumptively disabled and qualifies for benefits. Sims v. Barnhart, 309 F.3d 424, 428 (7th Cir. 2002).
The ALJ is required to articulate a minimal, but legitimate, justification for his decision to accept or reject specific evidence of a disability. Scheck v. Barnhart, 357 F.3d 697, 700 (7th Cir. 2004). The ALJ need not address every piece of evidence in his decision, but he cannot ignore a line of evidence that undermines the conclusions he made, and he must trace the path of his reasoning and connect the evidence to his findings and conclusions. Arnett v. Astrue, 676 F.3d 586, 592 (7th Cir. 2012); Clifford v. Apfel, 227 F.3d 863, 872 (7th Cir. 2000).
Mr. Crozier was born in 1953 and was 57 years old at the time of the alleged onset date. Mr. Crozier and a vocational expert testified at the hearing.

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