Facts

Valerie Corona sought judicial review of the Commissioner's denial of her application for Supplemental Security Income.

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS: Plaintiff contended the ALJ's mental residual functional capacity was flawed because the ALJ implicitly rejected plaintiff's treating physician's psychiatric consultative opinion that she was limited in her ability to deal with work pressure in a usual work setting, and the ALJ failed to account for her moderate limitations in concentration, persistence, or pace. Plaintiff also contended the ALJ failed to properly assess her physical RFC by ignoring the presented medical opinions and basing the RFC on his own opinion evidence of record.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS: Defendant contended the ALJ did not reject the findings of plaintiff's treating physician, and instead accommodated plaintiff's difficulties with work pressure by including limitations on tax complexity and social interaction in the plaintiff's RFC. Defendant also relied on Stubbs-Danielson v. Astrue, contending the ALJ's RFC determination limiting the plaintiff to simple tasks and to not work with the general public, and no responsibility for safety-related operations, sufficiently encompassed her moderate limitations in concentration, persistence, or pace.

Defendant further contended the ALJ did not reject all medical evidence, and instead mostly adopted the opinions of the internal consultative examiner and the state agency reviewing physicians, ultimately adopting greater functional restrictions than those found by the physicians.

Result

The court found that the ALJ's RFC sufficiently captured the plaintiff's moderate limitations related to concentration, persistence, or pace, and that the ALJ's physical RFC determination was supported by substantial evidence showing the plaintiff could perform a restricted range of light work. The decision of the Commissioner was affirmed.