(SS) Medina v. Commissioner of Social Security

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaSeptember 12, 20221:20-cv-01714California6,616 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

I. Introduction

12 Plaintiff Robert James Medina (“Plaintiff”) seeks judicial review of a final decision of the 13 Commissioner of Social Security (“Commissioner” or “Defendant”) denying his application for 14 supplemental security income pursuant to Title XVI of the Social Security Act. The matter is before 15 the Court on the parties’ briefs which were submitted without oral argument to the United States 16 Magistrate Judge. Docs. 19, 22, 23. After reviewing the record the Court finds that substantial 17 evidence and applicable law do not support the ALJ’s decision. Plaintiff’s appeal is therefore 18 granted.

II. Factual and Procedural Background2

20 On November 7, 2017 Plaintiff applied for disability insurance benefits alleging disability 21 as of July 5, 2017 due to depression, chronic pain, sleep apnea, anxiety and carpal tunnel. AR 178. 22 The Commissioner denied the application initially on January 24, 2018 and on reconsideration on 23 April 12, 2018. Plaintiff requested a hearing which was held before an Administrative Law Judge 24 (the “ALJ”) on February 13, 2020. AR 103–138. On March 18, 2020 the ALJ issued a decision 25 denying Plaintiff’s…

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.