6 Citing briefs
Summerfield, Jessica v. Colvin, Carolyn
MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT PLAINTIFF'S BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF REVERSING THE DECISION OF THE COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY
Filed July 29, 2016
The regulation goes on to state that while nonexamining sources can be given the greatest weight, “because nonexamining sources have no examining or treating relationship with you, the weight we will give their opinions will depend on the degree to which they provide supporting explanations for their opinions.” 20 CFR 404.1527(c)(3). But Dr. Lorber never provides Case: 3:15-cv-00623-jdp Document #: 20 Filed: 07/29/16 Page 12 of 17 13 any specific explanation in support of his conclusion that Ms. Summerfield would be capable of using her right arm for reaching for up to two-thirds of the workday.
Burleson v. Berryhill
MOTION for Summary Judgment - Social Security
Filed April 5, 2017
Thus, "a treating physician's opinion on the nature and severity of the claimed impairment is entitled to controlling weight if it is well supported by medically acceptable clinical and laboratory diagnostic techniques and is not inconsistent with the other substantial evidence in the record." Mastro v. Apfel, 270 F.3d 171, 178 (4th Cir. 2001); See also 20 CFR § 404.1527(c)(2). The ALJ should have given controlling weight to Dr. Garcha’s first opinion letter.
Mihlfeld v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner of
MEMORANDUM in Support of Motion re MOTION for Summary Judgment
Filed March 19, 2014
“Although [the Commissioner] consider[s] opinions from medical sources on issues such as . . . [the claimant’s] residual functional capacity . . . , the final responsibility for deciding these issues is reserved for the Commissioner.” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1527(d)(2), 416.927(d)(2).
Gjeci v. Commissioner of Social Security
MEMORANDUM DECISION & ORDER denying 17 Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings: For the reasons set forth above, Defendant's motion for judgment on the pleadings is DENIED. The Clerk of Court is directed to close the motion at ECF No. 17, to terminate this action, and to remand this action to the Social Security Administration for further proceedings.
Filed July 7, 2014
5, ECF No. 18.) Under the factors set forth in 20 C.F.R. § 404.1527(d)(2), any reliance on Dr. Inman-Dundon's report rather than Dr. Hargrove's would be improper. See Halloran, 362 F.3d at 32.
Simmons v. Colvin
MEMORANDUM DECISION & ORDER denying 10 Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; granting 12 Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings. For these reasons, defendant's motion for judgment on the pleadings is GRANTED and plaintiff's motion for judgment on the pleadings is DENIED. The Clerk of Court is directed to close the motions at ECF No. 10 and 12 and to terminate this action.
Filed January 8, 2014
As the ALJ correctly noted, the determination that a plaintiff is disabled is not a medical opinion, but rather an administrative finding that is "reserved to the Commissioner"; the ALJ therefore need "not give any special significance" to a doctor's view of a patient's disability. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1527(d)(3). Additionally, the ALJ properly determined that Dr. Wilson's opinion was inconsistent with plaintiffs testimony and with the objective medical evidence.
Krum v. Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company et al
MEMORANDUM DECISION and ORDER granting 19 Motion for Summary Judgment. Signed
Filed April 24, 2013
Black & Decker v. Nord, 538 U.S. 822, 825 (2003). But in dicta the Court noted that if the Secretary of Labor wished to promulgate a “treating physician rule,” such as the rule adopted by the SSA that Social Security administrative judges must give more weight to opinions from the claimant’s treating sources, 20 C.F.R. § 404.1527(d)(2) et seq. (2006), any court challenge to such a rule would be reviewed under the deferential Chevron standard. Id.