United States District Court, W.D. Arkansas, Texarkana Division
JENNIFER E. WILLIAMSON PLAINTIFF
NANCY A. BERRYHILL Acting Commissioner, Social Security Administration DEFENDANT
BARRY A. BRYANT U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE.
E. Williamson (“Plaintiff”) brings this action
pursuant to § 205(g) of Title II of the Social Security
Act (“The Act”), 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) (2010),
seeking judicial review of a final decision of the
Commissioner of the Social Security Administration
(“SSA”) denying her applications for Supplemental
Security Income (“SSI”), Disability Insurance
Benefits (“DIB”), and a period of disability
under Titles II and XVI of the Act.
Parties have consented to the jurisdiction of a magistrate
judge to conduct any and all proceedings in this case,
including conducting the trial, ordering the entry of a final
judgment, and conducting all post-judgment proceedings. ECF
No. 5. Pursuant to this authority, the Court
issues this memorandum opinion and orders the entry of a
final judgment in this matter.
protectively filed her disability applications on January 18,
2013. (Tr. 69). In her applications, Plaintiff alleges being
disabled due to fibromyalgia. (Tr. 264). Plaintiff alleges an
onset date of March 27, 2012. (Tr. 69). These applications
were denied initially and again upon reconsideration. (Tr.
Plaintiff requested an administrative hearing on her denied
applications. (Tr. 174-175). The ALJ granted that request and
held an administrative hearing on March 17, 2014 in
Texarkana, Arkansas. (Tr. 91-121). At this hearing, Plaintiff
was present and was represented by Greg Giles. Id.
Plaintiff and Vocational Expert (“VE”) Mr.
Fildry testified at this hearing. Id. At
this hearing, Plaintiff testified she was thirty-eight (38)
years old, which is defined as a “younger person”
under 20 C.F.R. § 416.963(c) (SSI) and 20 C.F.R. §
404.1563(c) (2008) (DIB). (Tr. 95). As for her level of
education, Plaintiff testified she completed high school and
“some” college. (Tr. 95).
this hearing, on April 24, 2015, the ALJ entered an
unfavorable decision denying Plaintiff's disability
applications. (Tr. 69-87). In this decision, the ALJ found
Plaintiff met the insured status requirements of the Act
through December 31, 2017. (Tr. 71, Finding 1). The ALJ
determined Plaintiff had not engaged in Substantial Gainful
Activity (“SGA”) since March 27, 2012, her
alleged onset date. (Tr. 71-72, Finding 2). The ALJ
determined Plaintiff had the following severe impairments:
fibromyalgia and obesity. (Tr. 72-73, Finding 3). Despite
being severe, the ALJ determined these impairments did not
meet or medically equal the requirements of any of the
Listings of Impairments in Appendix 1 to Subpart P of
Regulations No. 4 (“Listings”). (Tr. 73-76,
then considered Plaintiff's Residual Functional Capacity
(“RFC”). (Tr. 77-85, Finding 5). First, the ALJ
evaluated Plaintiff's subjective complaints and found her
claimed limitations were not entirely credible. Id.
Second, the ALJ determined Plaintiff retained the RFC to
perform the following:
I find that the claimant has the residual functional capacity
to perform sedentary work. She can stand and/or walk for
about 2 hours in an eight-hour workday, but sit 6 hours in an
eight-hour day. She is not limited in pushing and pulling
with her upper and lower extremities. She can occasionally
climb, bend, stoop, kneel, crouch, and crawl. She has no
manipulative, visual, environmental, or communicative
then evaluated Plaintiff's Past Relevant Work
(“PRW”) and found Plaintiff was unable to perform
her PRW. (Tr. 85-86, Finding 6). The ALJ also considered
whether Plaintiff retained the capacity to perform other work
existing in significant numbers in the national economy. (Tr.
86-87, Finding 10). The VE testified at the administrative
hearing regarding this issue. Id.
upon that testimony, the ALJ determined Plaintiff retained
the capacity to perform occupations such as the following:
(1) order clerk with 139, 000 such jobs in the nation and 500
such jobs in Arkansas; (2) assembler with 106, 000 such jobs
in the nation and 600 such jobs in Arkansas; and (3) cutter
with 136, 000 such jobs in the nation and 750 such jobs in
Arkansas. (Tr. 87). Because Plaintiff retained the capacity
to perform this other work, the ALJ determined Plaintiff had
not been under a disability, as defined by the Act, from
March 37, 2012 (application date) through April 24, 2015
(ALJ's decision date). (Tr. 87, Finding 11).
Plaintiff requested a review by the Appeals Council. (Tr.
62). On June 23, 2016, the Appeals Council denied this
request. (Tr. 1-3). On July 22, 2016, Plaintiff filed the
present appeal with this Court. ECF No. 1. The Parties
consented to the jurisdiction of this Court on July 22, 2016.
ECF No. 5. Both Parties have filed appeal briefs. ECF Nos.
12-13. This case is now ripe for determination.