(SS) Lancaster v. Commissioner of Social Security

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaApril 22, 20251:20-cv-01796California4,488 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

FACTS AND PRIOR PROCEEDINGS

4 Plaintiff applied for Title XVI Supplemental Security Income on May 18, 2018, alleging that 5 she became disabled on December 31, 2009. AR 281-293. 2 The claim was denied initially on 6 September 14, 2018, and on reconsideration on December 14, 2018. AR 141-154, 156-172. Plaintiff 7 requested a hearing before an administrative law judge (“ALJ”) and ALJ Lynn Ginsberg held a 8 hearing on April 29, 2020. AR 82-115. ALJ Ginsberg issued an order denying benefits on the basis 9 that Plaintiff was not disabled on May 11, 2020. AR 19-47. Plaintiff sought review of the ALJ’s 10 decision, which the Appeals Council denied. AR 8-13. This appeal followed. 11 Medical Record 12 The relevant medical record was reviewed by the Court and will be referenced below as 13 necessary to this Court’s decision. 14 The ALJ’s Decision 15 Using the Social Security Administration’s five-step sequential evaluation process, the ALJ 16 determined that Plaintiff was not disabled under the Social Security Act. AR 19-47. Specifically, the 17 ALJ found that Plaintiff had not engaged in substantial gainful activity since the application date of 18 May 18, 2018. AR 24. The…

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.