This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Government
Social Security Administration
Review of HHS Decision (DIWW)

Thomas Vinn v. Andrew M. Saul

Published: Apr. 10, 2020 | Result Date: Feb. 5, 2020 | Filing Date: Nov. 19, 2018 |

Case number: CV 18-09746-DFM Summary Judgment –  Defense

Judge

Douglas F. McCormick

Court

CD CA


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Patricia L. McCabe
(Law Office of Patricia L. McCabe)


Defendant

Stacy E. Wiesbrock
(Social Security Administration)


Facts

Plaintiff sought judicial review of the denial of plaintiff's application for Supplemental Security Income and Social Security disability insurance benefits.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS: Plaintiff alleged disability due to coronary artery disease, diverticulitis, hypertension, asthma, GERD, mild alcohol use, depression, and anxiety.Plaintiff contended the Administrative Law Judge erred when it improperly determined plaintiff's mental impairments were not severe. Plaintiff also contended that the ALJ erred when it rejected the opinion of his treating psychiatrist Dr. Sharon Guo. Plaintiff contended Dr. Guo properly opined that plaintiff had marked restrictions in activities of daily living; moderate difficulties in maintaining social functioning; moderate deficiencies of concentration, persistence or pace; and three repeated episodes of decompensation, each of extended duration. Finally, plaintiff contended the ALJ improperly discounted plaintiff's subjective symptom testimony.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS: Defendant denied plaintiff's contentions and further contended although the ALJ determined plaintiff had impairments, the ALJ properly concluded that those impairments were not severe. Defendant contended plaintiff did not have an impairment or combination of impairments that met or medically equaled one of the listed impairments. Defendant contended despite the impairments, plaintiff retained the residual functional capacity to perform the full range of light work without any additional limitations and ultimately contended plaintiff was not disabled because he could return to his past work. Defendant additionally contended that Dr. Guo's opinions were inconsistent with her own treatment notes and the record lacked any evidence of an alleged extended episode of decompensation. Defendant contended plaintiff had not been psychiatrically hospitalized and the record lacked evidence of any psychotic breaks, nervous breakdowns, or episodes of extremely disorganized behavior.

Result

The court affirmed the ALJ's decision and dismissed the case with prejudice.


#134378

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390