Bargas
Bargas v. Astrue
Opinion
lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM ****
Philip D. Bargas (“Bargas”) appeals from the district court’s order affirming the Administrative Law Judge’s (“ALJ”) denial of supplemental security income at the fifth step of the Social Security benefits review process. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920 (a)(4)(v). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we reverse and remand for further proceedings.
Although the ALJ characterized Bar-gas’s diabetes, depression, and thrombocytopenia as “severe impairments” during his step two analysis, he found Bargas was not disabled and capable of performing jobs with light work requirements during his step five analysis. In reaching this conclusion, the ALJ discredited Bargas’s testimony and rejected the joint medical opinion of examining physicians Dr. Charles Bury (“Dr. Bury”) and Physician’s Assistant Roger Cummings (“PA Cummings”).
*847 Bargas, however, contends that the ALJ erroneously discredited his testimony with respect to the impairments and limitations that result from his thrombocytopenia and depression. Specifically, Bargas makes two claims: (a) the ALJ failed to provide adequate reasoning for his decision to reject Bargas’s testimony regarding…