United States District Court, S.D. Georgia, Statesboro Division
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Corey Lee Holton seeks judicial review of the Social Security
Administration (SSA)'s denial of his application for
Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefits.
social security cases, courts
. . . review the Commissioner's decision for substantial
evidence. Winschel v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec., 631
F.3d 1176, 1178 (11th Cir. 2011). “Substantial evidence
is more than a scintilla and is such relevant evidence as a
reasonable person would accept as adequate to support a
conclusion.” Id. (quotation omitted). . . .
“We may not decide the facts anew, reweigh the
evidence, or substitute our judgment for that of the
Commissioner.” Winschel, 631 F.3d at 1178
(quotation and brackets omitted). “If the
Commissioner's decision is supported by substantial
evidence, this Court must affirm, even if the proof
preponderates against it.” Dyer v. Barnhart,
395 F.3d 1206, 1210 (11th Cir. 2005) (quotation omitted).
Mitchell v. Comm'r, Soc. Sec. Admin., 771 F.3d
780, 782 (11th Cir. 2014).
burden of proving disability lies with the claimant.
Moore v. Barnhart, 405 F.3d 1208, 1211 (11th Cir.
2005). The ALJ applies
. . . a five-step, “sequential” process for
determining whether a claimant is disabled. 20 C.F.R. §
404.1520(a)(1). If an ALJ finds a claimant disabled or not
disabled at any given step, the ALJ does not go on to the
next step. Id. § 404.1520(a)(4). At the first
step, the ALJ must determine whether the claimant is
currently engaged in substantial gainful activity.
Id. § 404.1520(a)(4)(i). At the second step,
the ALJ must determine whether the impairment or combination
of impairments for which the claimant allegedly suffers is
“severe.” Id. § 404.1520(a)(4)(ii).
At the third step, the ALJ must decide whether the
claimant's severe impairments meet or medically equal a
listed impairment. Id. § 404.1520(a)(4)(iii).
If not, the ALJ must then determine at step four whether the
claimant has the RFC to perform her past relevant work.
Id. § 404.1520(a)(4)(iv). If the claimant
cannot perform her past relevant work, the ALJ must determine
at step five whether the claimant can make an adjustment to
other work, considering the claimant's RFC, age,
education, and work experience. An ALJ may make this
determination either by applying the Medical Vocational
Guidelines or by obtaining the testimony of a [Vocational
Stone v. Comm'r. of Soc. Sec. Admin., 596 F.
App'x, 878, 879 (11th Cir. 2015) (footnote added).
was 23 years old at the time of his application, has no past
relevant work, and has only a limited education (10th grade).
Tr. 28, 42. After a hearing, ALJ Richard Furcolo issued an
unfavorable decision. Tr. 1-7, 28-44. He found that
Holton's borderline intellectual functioning constituted
a severe impairment but did not meet or medically equal a
Listing. Tr. 30-34. Based on the evidence of record, the ALJ
found that Holton retained the RFC for a full range of work
at all exertional levels, except that
he is limited to performing simple, routine, repetitive
tasks. He could make only simple work-related decisions, and
he could have only occasional contact with the public.
he determined, had no past relevant work but could perform
the requirements of work as a packager, assembler, and
laundry worker, all unskilled work with an SVP of 2. Tr. 73-74.
Hence, Holton was not disabled. Tr. 42-43. Holton disagrees,
arguing that the ALJ erred in determining he did not meet
Listing 12.05B. Doc. 12.