United States District Court, W.D. Arkansas, Fort Smith Division
ERIN L. WIEDEMANN UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Lisa Billingsley, 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 disability
and disability insurance benefits (DIB) and supplemental
security income (SSI) benefits 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. §
filed her application for DIB and protectively filed her
application for SSI on July 11, 2014, and August 19, 2014,
respectively, alleging an inability to work since February
23, 2013, due to fibromyalgia, depression, anxiety, bone spur
in back, lower back problems, sciatic nerve problems,
herniated disc in neck, arthritis, and irritable bowel
syndrome. (Tr. 73-74, 85-86, 99-100, 115-116). An
administrative video hearing was held on January 5, 2016, at
which Plaintiff and a vocational expert testified. (Tr.
written decision dated February 18, 2016, the ALJ found that
during the relevant time periods, Plaintiff had severe
impairments of degenerative disc disease of the lumbar and
cervical spine, irritable bowel syndrome, restless leg
syndrome, fibromyalgia, obstructive sleep apnea,
osteoarthritis, and depression. (Tr. 33-34). After reviewing
all 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. 34). The ALJ found Plaintiff retained the residual
functional capacity (RFC) to perform sedentary work as
defined in 20 CFR 404.1567(a) and 416.967(a) except for the
[C]laimant should be allowed to sit or stand at will. The
claimant should never climb ladders, ropes or scaffolds. She
should no more than occasionally climb ramps and stairs,
balance, stoop, kneel, crouch, and crawl. The claimant should
avoid all hazards and unprotected heights. She is restricted
to no more than occasional overhead reaching. She should have
no contact with the general public, and no more than
occasional changes to the workplace setting. The work should
be limited to unskilled work where interpersonal contact
would be incidental to the work performed. Supervision would
be simple, direct and concrete to the worker. The work must
be limited to SVP 1 or 2 jobs that could be learned within 30
(Tr. 37-42). With the help of a vocational expert, the ALJ
determined that Plaintiff was unable to perform her past
relevant work as a school cafeteria cook. (Tr. 42). However,
based on the Plaintiff's age, education, work experience,
and RFC, the ALJ determined that there were jobs that existed
in significant numbers in the national economy that the
Plaintiff could perform, such as a document preparer or a
compact assembler. (Tr. 43). Ultimately, the ALJ concluded
that the Plaintiff had not been under a disability within the
meaning of the Social Security Act from February 23, 2013,
through the date of the decision. (Tr. 43).
then requested a review of the hearing decision by the
Appeals Council, which denied that request on March 16, 2017.
(Tr. 1-7). Subsequently, Plaintiff filed this action. (Doc.
1). This case is before the undersigned pursuant to the
consent of the parties. (Doc. 7). Both parties have filed
appeal briefs, and the case is now ready for decision. (Docs.
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
Plaintiff's 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), aff'd, 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