Opinion ID: 3014065
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Ramirez’s M ental Health

Text: activities of daily living, (2) had slight Treatment/Evaluation diffic ulties in ma intainin g soc ial Ramirez first sought mental health functioning, (3) often experienced treatment in February 1995 from Dr. H.H. deficiencies of concentration, persistence, Park, who diagnosed her with generalized or pace, and (4) never experienced anxiety disorder with depression. Over the e p i s o d e s o f deterio r a t io n o r next twenty-two months, Dr. Park decompensation in work-like settings. prescribed various medications with Based on those findings, Dr. Poloni -2- concluded that Ramirez had a severe C. Procedural History After Remand anxiety disorder, but that Ramirez’s Following the remand by the SSA condition did not meet or equal any of the Appeals Council, the ALJ held a second mental impairments deemed by the SSA to hearing. The ALJ considered, among other be presumptively disabling. Consequently, things, all of the evidence described above Dr. Poloni proceeded to complete a Mental concerning Ramirez’s mental impairments. Residual Functional Capacity (“MRFC”) Near the conclusion of the second hearing form, which is meant to assess a claimant’s on remand, the ALJ posed the following ability to perform either the claimant’s hypothetical question to vocational expert previous work or other work in the Julie Stratton: national economy. Dr. Poloni determined that Ramirez could perform simple, routine I will begin by asking you to unskilled work. assume that we’re talking about an individual of Ms. Ramirez’s mental functioning was Ramirez’s age, education also in 1998 assessed by Dr. Herman and prior work history. And Rudnick, a Board certified psychiatrist. I’d like you to further Dr. Rudnick concluded that Ramirez assume that this individual’s suffered from anxiety-related and capable of performing a personality disorders. As to the four broad range of sedentary work. areas of mental functioning, Dr. Rudnick The wor k should be found that Ramirez (1) had only pe r f or me d in a we ll moderately limited daily activities, (2) had ventilated facility, with no moderately limited social functioning, (3) exposure to dust, fumes, often experienced deficiencies of pets, animals, chemicals, or concentration, persistence, or pace, (4) and temperature extremes. The did not experience any episodes of work should provide for deterioration or decompensation. Like Dr. occasional breaks, for the Poloni before him, Dr. Rudnick found that individual use of an inhaler Ramirez’s mental impairments did not or pump. The work should meet or equal the criteria of a listed involve simple one to two impairment. As to Ramirez’s residual step tasks. The work should functional capacity, Dr. Rudnick opined not require the individual that Ramirez could not perform complex during the course of or complicated work and would need to be performing the work to able to contact her home from work, but travel outside of th e that there was no need to limit Ramirez’s workplace. And . . . the interaction with the public or with co- work setting should provide workers. reasonable opportunity for the individual to make and -3- receive personal phone mentioned this particular limitation. calls. Within the boundaries Ramirez appealed the ALJ’s of these limitations, . . . are decision, but the Appeals Council declined there jobs in the regional or to grant review. Ramirez then challenged national economy that the the ALJ’s ruling in the United States individual could perform? District Court for the District of Eastern (A.R. at 457-58.) It is significant that Pennsylvania, where Ramirez and the neither Dr. Weiss’s evaluation nor his Commissioner filed cross-motions for conclusions found expression in the summary judgment. The District Court hypothetical. referred the cross-motions to a Magistrate Judge for a Report and Recommendation. The purpose of the hypothetical was to assess Ramirez’s residual functional Although Ramirez made a number capacity. Stratton responded that, of claims, one of her primary arguments notwithstanding the limitations contained was that the ALJ had failed to include in in the hypothetical, there were several jobs her hypothetical the finding she had made in the local and national economy that the on the PRTF that Ramirez often suffered hypothetical claimant could perform, deficiencies in concentration, persistence, including assembler, hand packer, and or pace. The Magistrate Judge rejected all production inspector. of Ramirez’s arguments except for the PRTF argument, finding that it was “not The ALJ then issued a written clear whether a limitation in concentration, decision in which she determined that persistence or pace within the hypothetical Ramirez was not disabled and therefore . . . would have changed the vocational she again denied Ramirez’s application for expert’s response.” The Magistrate Judge SSI. In reaching her decision, the ALJ recommended that the District Court relied heavily on Stratton’s testimony. remand to the ALJ to allow for further The ALJ attached to her written testimony by a vocational expert. decision a completed PRTF, as she was The Commissioner objected only to required to do under the then-existing the Magistrate Judge’s finding that the Social Security Regulations. In a section ALJ’s hypothetical was deficient. The of the PRTF entitled, “Functional District Court adopted those portions of Limitation and Degree of Limitation,” the the Magistrate’s Report to which no ALJ noted tha t Ramirez “often” objection was raised, but disapproved that experienced “deficiencies o f portion of the Magistrate Judge’s Report concentration, persistence, or pace which found the ALJ’s hypothetical to be resulting in a failure to complete tasks in a defective. The District Court explained timely manner (in work settings or that “the standards articulated by the Third