Norma Banuelos v. Andrew M. Saul
Published: Mar. 19, 2021 | Result Date: Feb. 25, 2021 | Filing Date: Nov. 22, 2019 |Case number: 1:19-cv-01652-SKO Summary Judgment – Plaintiff
Judge
Court
USDC Eastern District of California
Attorneys
Petitioner
Jonathan O. Pena-Mancinas
(Pena & Bromberg PC)
Respondent
Benjamin E. Hall
(Office of the U.S. Attorney)
Facts
Plaintiff Norma Banuelos sought review of the Commissioner of Social Security's decision denying plaintiff's application for disability insurance benefits and Supplemental Security Income under the Social Security Act.
Contentions
PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS: Plaintiff contended she became disabled due to fibromyalgia, anemia, endometriosis, arthritis, hernia surgery, depression, and anxiety. Plaintiff contended she was evaluated for her lower back and bilateral extremity pain in 2016 and the St. George Spine and Pain Institute determined Plaintiff had positive tenderness in her low back, with limited range of motion. Plaintiff further contended she was evaluated by Dr. Roger A. Izzi who diagnosed Plaintiff with a major depressive disorder accompanied by anxious stress. Plaintiff contended Dr. Izzi also opined that Plaintiff's mood disorder would fluctuate and there was likely some depression. Plaintiff contended as a result, Dr. Izzi. Opined that Plaintiff's ability to get along with peers or be supervised in a work-like setting would be moderately limited by her fluctuated mood disorder. Thus, overall Plaintiff contended Defendant erred when it concluded Plaintiff was not disabled because the ALJ had previously determined Plaintiff suffered from the severe impairments of osteoarthritis, fibromyalgia, and anxiety disorder. Plaintiff further contended Defendant erred when it gave little weight to the opinion of Plaintiff's treating and examining physicians without legitimate reasons supported by substantial evidence.
DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS: Defendant denied Plaintiff's contentions, and contended Plaintiff did not have an impairment or combination of impairments that amounted to medical severity to be considered disabled.
Result
The court ruled in Plaintiff's favor because Defendant failed to articulate specific and legitimate reasons supported by substantial evidence for rejecting Plaintiff's medical opinion evidence.
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
jeremy@reprintpros.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390