Source: http://ri.findacase.com/research/wfrmDocViewer.aspx/xq/fac.20150107_0000014.DRI.htm/qx
Timestamp: 2020-06-02 12:02:42
Document Index: 66466798

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 405', '§ 636', '§ 405', '§ 405', '§ 416', '§ 404']

FindACase™ | Constantine v. Colvin
Constantine v. Colvin
LAURA CONSTANTINE,
CAROLYN COLVIN Commissioner of the Social Security Administration.
This matter is before the Court for judicial review of a final decision of the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration ("Commissioner") denying Supplemental Security Income ("SSI") benefits under the Social Security Act (the "Act"), 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). Plaintiff filed her Complaint on April 9, 2014 seeking to reverse the decision of the Commissioner. On September 30, 2014, Plaintiff filed a Motion to Remand. (Document No. 13).[1] On October 31, 2014, the Commissioner filed a Motion for an Order Affirming the Decision of the Commissioner. (Document No. 14).
This matter has been referred to me for preliminary review, findings and recommended disposition. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B); LR Cv 72. Based upon my review of the record, the parties' submissions and independent research, I find that there is substantial evidence in this record to support the Commissioner's decision and findings that Plaintiff is not disabled within the meaning of the Act. Consequently, I recommend that the Commissioner's Motion for Order Affirming the Decision of the Commissioner (Document No. 14) be GRANTED and that Plaintiff's Motion to Remand (Document No. 13) be DENIED.
Plaintiff filed an application for SSI on June 24, 2011 alleging disability since January 2, 2011 (Tr. 182-191) due to a back injury. (Tr. 111). The application was denied initially on September 7, 2011 (Tr. 111-119) and on reconsideration on January 24, 2012. (Tr. 120-130). On December 4, 2012, Plaintiff requested an Administrative hearing. (Tr. 16). On September 10, 2012, a hearing was held before Administrative Law Judge Matthew Kuperstein (the "ALJ") at which time Plaintiff, represented by counsel, [2] and a vocational expert ("VE") appeared and testified. (Tr. 35-84). The ALJ issued an unfavorable decision to Plaintiff on November 16, 2012. (Tr. 18-30). The Appeals Council denied Plaintiff's Request for Review on February 11, 2014, therefore the ALJ's decision became final. (Tr. 1-4). A timely appeal was then filed with this Court.
Plaintiff summarily seeks remand but has not identified or articulated any alleged error in the ALJ's decision or other support for a remand in this case.
The Commissioner objects to Plaintiff's request for remand and submitted a detailed memorandum asserting that the ALJ's findings are supported by substantial evidence and must be affirmed by this Court.
The court may remand a case to the Commissioner for a rehearing under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g); under sentence six of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g); or under both sentences. Seavey, 276 F.3d at 8. To remand under sentence four, the court must either find that the Commissioner's decision is not supported by substantial evidence, or that the Commissioner incorrectly applied the law relevant to the disability claim. Id .; accord Brenem v. Harris, 621 F.2d 688, 690 (5th Cir. 1980) (remand appropriate where record was insufficient to affirm, but also was insufficient for district court to find claimant disabled).
A sentence six remand may be warranted, even in the absence of an error by the Commissioner, if new, material evidence becomes available to the claimant. Id . With a sentence six remand, the parties must return to the court after remand to file modified findings of fact. Id . The court retains jurisdiction pending remand, and does not enter a final judgment until after the completion of remand proceedings. Id.
The law defines disability as the inability to do 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. §§ 416(i), 423(d)(1); 20 C.F.R. § 404.1505. The impairment must be severe, making the claimant unable to do her previous work, or any other ...