(SS) Aaron v. Commissioner of Social security

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaMarch 3, 20251:24-cv-00372California6,259 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

FACTS AND PRIOR PROCEEDINGS

4 Plaintiff applied for Title XVI Supplemental Security Income on September 27, 2021, alleging 5 that he became disabled on January 7, 2007. AR 253-262. The claim was denied initially on 6 February 16, 2022, and on reconsideration on September 19, 2022. AR 123, 147. Plaintiff requested a 7 hearing before an administrative law judge (“ALJ”) and ALJ Scot Septer held a hearing on May 11, 8 2023. AR 44-65. ALJ Septer issued an order denying benefits on the basis that Plaintiff was not 9 disabled on July 6, 2023. AR 18-43. Plaintiff sought review of the ALJ’s decision, which the Appeals 10 Council denied. AR 5-10. This appeal followed. 11 May 11, 2023 Hearing Testimony 12 ALJ Septer held a telephonic hearing on May 11, 2023. AR 44-65. Stephen Schmidt, an 13 impartial vocational expert, also appeared and testified. Plaintiff’s attorney Irene Ruzin was also 14 present. The ALJ began by confirming Plaintiff’s identity and Plaintiff’s attorney confirmed that the 15 record was complete and that there were no objections. AR 46-48. The ALJ then entered Exhibits B- 16 1A through B-10F into evidence. AR 48. Plaintiff’s attorney Ms. Ruzin opened by…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.