Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Mobley v. Colvin

United States District Court, Southern District of Georgia, Augusta Division

November 6, 2014

RICHARD WAYNE MOBLEY, Plaintiff,
v.
CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting Commissioner of Social Security Administration, Defendant

For Richard Wayne Mobley, Plaintiff: Mario Anthony Pacella, LEAD ATTORNEY, Strom Law Firm, LLC, Brunswick, GA.

For Carolyn W. Colvin, Acting Commissioner of Social Security Administration, Defendant: Shannon Heath Statkus, U.S. Attorney's Office - AUG, Augusta, GA.

Social Security Administration, Notice, Pro se.

MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

BRIAN K. EPPS, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.

Richard Wayne Mobley (" Plaintiff") appeals the decision of the Commissioner of Social Security (" Commissioner") denying his application for Disability Insurance Benefits (" DIB") under the Social Security Act. Upon consideration of the briefs submitted by both parties, the record evidence, and the relevant statutory and case law, the Court REPORTS and RECOMMENDS, pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), that the Commissioner's final decision be REVERSED and that the case be REMANDED to the Commissioner for further consideration in accordance with this opinion.

I. BACKGROUND

Plaintiff protectively applied for DIB on June 13, 2009, alleging a disability onset date of March 10, 2008. Tr. (" R."), pp. 74, 158-161. The Social Security Administration denied Plaintiff's applications initially, R. at 74, 76, 78, and on reconsideration, R. at 89. Plaintiff then requested a hearing before an Administrative Law Judge (" ALJ"), R. at 91-93, and the ALJ held a hearing on June 28, 2012, R. at 44-72. At the hearing, the ALJ heard testimony from Plaintiff, who was represented by counsel and Robert E. Brabham, a Vocational Expert (" VE"). Id. On July 18, 2012, the ALJ issued a partially favorable decision. R. at 27-38.

Applying the five-step sequential process required by 20 C.F.R. § 404.920, the ALJ found:

1. The claimant has not engaged in substantial gainful activity since the alleged onset date (20 CFR 404.1571 et seq .).
2. Since the alleged onset date of disability, March 10, 2008, the claimant has had the following severe impairments: diabetes mellitus, adjustment disorder with mixed depression and anxiety, and hypertension (20 CFR 404.1520(c)).
3. Since the alleged onset date of disability, March 10, 2008, the claimant has not had an impairment or combination of impairments that meets or medically equals the severity of one of the listed impairments in 20 CFR Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1 (20 CFR 404.1520(d), 404.1525 and 404.1526).
4. Prior to October 13, 2011, the date the claimant became disabled, the claimant had the residual functional capacity to perform a range of medium work as defined in 20 CFR 404.1567(c) in that he could lift and carry no more than fifty pounds occasionally and twenty-five pounds frequently; stand and walk for about six hours in an eight-hour workday; and sit throughout the workday. He could frequently balance, stoop, kneel, crouch, and crawl, occasionally climb ramps and stairs, but never climb ladders, ropes, and scaffolds. He had to avoid concentrated exposure to extremes of heat and cold. By reason of his mental impairment, he was then further restricted to work requiring only simple instructions and no more than occasional contact with the public. Beginning on October 13, 2011, the claimant has the residual functional capacity to perform a range of medium work as deemed in 20 CFR 404.1567(c) as described above, except that his worsened physical and mental condition now prevents him from sustaining concentration, persistence, or pace to complete an eighthour workday.
5. Prior to October 13, 2011, considering the claimant's age, education, work experience, and residual functional capacity, there were jobs that existed in significant numbers in the national economy that the claimant could have performed (20 CFR 404.1569 and 404.1569a). Beginning on October 13, 2011, considering the claimant's age, education, work experience, and residual functional capacity, there are no jobs that exist in ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.