(SS) Senter v. Commissioner of Social Security

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaMarch 11, 20241:22-cv-01564California6,360 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

INTRODUCTION

19 Aaron Paul Senter (“Plaintiff”) seeks judicial review of a final decision of the Commissioner 20 of Social Security (“Commissioner” or “Defendant”) denying his application for disability benefits 21 pursuant to the Social Security Act. The matter is currently before the Court on the parties’ briefs, 22 which were submitted, without oral argument, to Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone.1 23 Plaintiff requests the decision of Commissioner be vacated and the case be remanded for further 24 proceedings, arguing the ALJ failed to reconcile an apparent conflict between the residual functional 25 capacity and the vocational expert’s testimony. 26 For the reasons explained herein, Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment shall be denied. 27 1 The parties have consented to the jurisdiction of the United States Magistrate Judge and this action has been assigned 1 II. 2 BACKGROUND 3 A. Procedural History 4 Plaintiff protectively filed an application for supplemental security income on January 28, 5 2019. (AR 74.) Plaintiff’s application was initially denied on June 4, 2019, and denied upon 6 …

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.