United States District Court, W.D. Arkansas, Fayetteville Division
ERIN L. WIEDEMANN UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.
Bradley Brown, 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 his claims for a period of disability
and disability insurance benefits (DIB) 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. §
protectively filed his current applications for DIB and SSI
on February 19, 2013, alleging an inability to work since
October 4, 2011, due to carpal tunnel syndrome, Graves'
disease, thyroid problems, high blood pressure, borderline
diabetic, depression, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD),
anxiety and restless leg syndrome. (Tr. 102-103, 115-116,
128, 141). For DIB purposes, Plaintiff maintained insured
status through March 31, 2015. (Tr. 102, 128, 161). An
administrative hearing was held on January 17, 2014, at which
Plaintiff and a vocational expert testified. (Tr. 48-78). The
ALJ issued a written opinion dated April 17, 2014, where he
found that the Plaintiff had not been under a disability
within the meaning of the Social Security Act. (Tr. 169).
Plaintiff subsequently appealed the decision to the Appeals
Council, who remanded the case back to the ALJ on October 30,
2015. (Tr. 175-179). A second administrative hearing was held
on April 28, 2016, at which Plaintiff and a Vocational expert
testified. (Tr. 28-46).
written decision dated June 23, 2016, the ALJ found that
during the relevant time period, Plaintiff had severe
impairments of anxiety, depression, personality disorder,
degenerative disc disease, and carpal tunnel syndrome. (Tr.
14). 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. 14-15). The ALJ found that Plaintiff
retained the residual functional capacity (RFC) to perform
light work as defined in 20 CFR 404.1567(b) and 416.967(b),
except for the following:
[Plaintiff] is limited to occasional climbing, balancing,
crawling, kneeling, stooping, and crouching; frequent
fingering and handling bilaterally; can perform simple,
routine, repetitive tasks in a setting where interpersonal
contact is incidental to the work performed; and can respond
to supervision that is simple, direct, and concrete.
(Tr. 15). With the help of a vocational expert (VE), the ALJ
determined that although Plaintiff was unable to perform his
past relevant work, there were jobs that existed in
significant numbers in the national economy that Plaintiff
could perform, such as a price marker, a plastics molding
machine tender, and a routing clerk. (Tr. 18). The ALJ
concluded that the Plaintiff had not been under a disability,
as defined in the Social Security Act, from October 4, 2011,
through the date of the decision. (Tr. 19).
Plaintiff requested a review of the hearing decision by the
Appeals Council, and that request was denied on September 25,
2011. (Tr. 1-7). Subsequently, Plaintiff filed this action.
(Doc. 1). This case is before the undersigned pursuant to the
consent of the parties. (Doc. 6). 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 this 22nd day of March, 2019.
 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