United States District Court, W.D. Arkansas, Harrison Division
JASMINE J. PUPLAVA-McDANIEL PLAINTIFF
NANCY A. BERRYHILL,  Acting Commissioner, Social Security Administration DEFENDANT
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND JUDGMENT
ERIN L. WIEDEMANN, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Jasmine J. Puplava-McDaniel, brings this action pursuant to
42 U.S.C. § 405(g), seeking judicial review of a
decision of the Commissioner of the Social Security
Administration (Commissioner) denying her claims for a period
of child's insurance benefits (CIB) and supplemental
security income (SSI) under the provisions of Titles II and
XVI of the Social Security Act (Act). In this judicial
review, the Court must determine whether there is substantial
evidence in the administrative record to support the
Commissioner's decision. See 42 U.S.C. §
April 25, 2013, Plaintiff filed an application for
child's insurance benefits based on disability and also
protectively filed her current application for SSI. Plaintiff
alleges a disability onset date of August 1, 2012, due to a
broken back and fractured hip caused by a motor vehicle
accident in 2009. (Tr. 70, 80, 92, 105). An administrative
hearing was held on September 23, 2014, at which Plaintiff,
Plaintiff's husband, and a vocational expert testified.
written decision dated January 5, 2015, the ALJ found that
during the relevant time periods, Plaintiff had the following
severe impairments: residuals of injuries from a motor
vehicle accident with compression fractures of thoracic
spine, and generalized anxiety. (Tr. 12). However, after
reviewing all of the evidence presented, the ALJ determined
that Plaintiff's impairments did not meet or equal the
level of severity of any impairment listed in the Listing of
Impairments found in Appendix I, Subpart P, Regulation No. 4.
(Tr. 13-14). The ALJ found that Plaintiff retained the
residual functional capacity (RFC) to:
perform light work as defined in 20 CFR 404.1567(b) and
413.967(b) except she is limited to jobs involving simple
tasks and simple instructions, and only incidental contact
with the public.
(Tr. 14-19). The Plaintiff has no past relevant
work, but considering the claimant's age,
education, work experience, RFC, and the testimony of the
vocational expert, the ALJ determined that Plaintiff was
capable of performing work as a housekeeper, machine tender,
and inspector. (Tr. 19-20).
then requested a review of the hearing decision by the
Appeals Council, which denied that request on February 17,
2016. (Tr. 1-3). Subsequently, Plaintiff filed this action on
March 17, 2016. (Doc. 1). This case is before the undersigned
pursuant to the consent of the parties. (Doc. 5). Both
parties have filed appeal briefs, and the case is now ready
for decision. (Docs. 14, 15).
Court's role is to determine whether the
Commissioner's findings are supported by substantial
evidence on the record as a whole. Ramirez v.
Barnhart, 292 F.3d 576, 583 (8th Cir. 2002). Substantial
evidence is less than a preponderance but it is enough that a
reasonable mind would find it adequate to support the
Commissioner's decision. The ALJ's decision must be
affirmed if the record contains substantial evidence to
support it. Edwards v. Barnhart 314 F.3d 964, 966
(8th Cir. 2003). As long as there is substantial evidence in
the record that supports the Commissioner's decision, the
Court may not reverse it simply because substantial evidence
exists in the record that would have supported a contrary
outcome, or because the Court would have decided the case
differently. Haley v. Massanari, 258 F.3d 742, 747
(8th Cir. 2001). In other words, if after reviewing the
record it is possible to draw two inconsistent positions from
the evidence and one of those positions represents the
findings of the ALJ, the decision of the ALJ must be
affirmed. Young v. Apfel 221 F.3d 1065, 1068 (8th
Court has reviewed the entire transcript and the parties'
briefs. For the reasons stated in the ALJ's well-reasoned
opinion and the Government's brief, the Court finds
Plaintiff s arguments on appeal to be without merit and finds
that the record as a whole reflects substantial evidence to
support the ALJ's decision. Accordingly, the ALJ's
decision is hereby summarily affirmed and Plaintiffs
Complaint is dismissed with prejudice. See Sledge v.
Astrue, No. 08-0089, 2008 WL 4816675 (W.D. Mo. Oct. 31,
2008) (summarily affirming ALJ's denial of disability
benefits), affd, 364 Fed.Appx. 307 (8th Cir. 2010).
SO ORDERED AND ADJUDGED.
 Nancy A. Berryhill, has been appointed
to serve as acting Commissioner of Social Security, and is
substituted as Defendant, pursuant to Rule 25(d)(1) of the
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
 The Plaintiff was previously employed
as a housekeeper, a sewing machine operator, and a car hop,
but this past work did not rise to the level of substantial