(SS)Sweeley

(SS)Sweeley v. Commissioner of Social Security

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaMarch 29, 20241:23-cv-01209California4,588 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

2 3

4 5 6 7 8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10 11 12 MICHAEL SWEELEY, Case No. 1:23-cv-01209-EPG 13 Plaintiff, FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER

REGARDING PLAINTIFF’S SOCIAL

14 v. SECURITY COMPLAINT 15 COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, (ECF Nos. 1, 14).

16 Defendant. 17 18 19 This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s complaint for judicial review of an 20 unfavorable decision by the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration regarding his 21 application for supplemental security income benefits. The parties have consented to entry of 22 final judgment by the United States Magistrate Judge under the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), 23 with any appeal to the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. (ECF No. 11). 24 Plaintiff argues as follows: 25 1. The ALJ prejudiced the RFC assessment by erroneously rejecting medical 26 opinions from psychologists Sara Bowerman, PhD and Thomas Maples, PhD.

27 2. The ALJ’s reasoning in rejecting Mr. Burkan’s testimony is illogical and not supported by substantial evidence. 28 2 Having reviewed…

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.