Facts

On August 15, 2019, Maria Ramos filed an application for supplemental security income (SSI), alleging a disability onset date of July 18, 2018, due to arthritis of the right knee and use of a cane. On October 22, 2019, Ramos filed an application for disability insurance benefits (DIB), alleging the same onset date and cause. The Commissioner of Social Security denied both claims initially on December 10, 2019. Ramos requested a hearing before an administrative law judge (ALJ).

At the hearing, the ALJ considered Ramos's statements regarding her knee pain and medical evidence and other evidence. According to a work history, Ramos had worked in several jobs with the same company, including bagging groceries, arranging flowers, and baking. She also had experience working in a floral department and at a deli service counter. A vocational expert testified at the hearing that a person with a residual functional capacity like Ramos's could work as a flower arranger or at a deli counter in the same way Ramos had previously. Ramos also testified regarding her daily activities, which included her admission that she regularly dressed and groomer herself, drove a car, and walked to the park with her grandchildren.

Ultimately, the ALJ found that Ramos had not engaged in substantial gainful activity since July 28, 2018, and that she had severe right knee arthritis and obesity, but it concluded that she did not have an impairment that medically equaled the severity of a listed impairment giving that qualifies an applicant for benefits. Instead, the ALJ concluded that Ramos had the residual functional capacity to perform light work with some exceptions, and that Ramos could still perform past relevant work as a floral arranger and deli counter worker. The ALJ specifically noted that plaintiff had received pain medications and injections, which were medically conservative treatments, and that these treatments, along with objective medical evidence and evidence of Ramos's daily activities undermined her testimony regarding her condition. Accordingly, the ALJ determined that Ramos was not under a disability.

Ramos sought judicial review of the Commissioner's denial of her applications.

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS: Plaintiff contended that the ALJ failed to provide specific, and convincing reasons for discounting her allegations of pain and physical dysfunction; that the ALJ improperly relied on outdated medical opinions; and that plaintiff's past work at a grocery store was a composite job, and that she could not perform that work as it is generally performed.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS: The defendant denied all the plaintiff's material allegations.

Result

The court affirmed the decision of the Commissioner denying plaintiff's benefits.