The opinion of the court was delivered by: VINCENT L. BRODERICK
VINCENT L. BRODERICK, U.S.D.J.
This is an action under the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. 405(g), challenging a final determination of the Secretary of Health and Human Services (the "Secretary") denying plaintiff Social Security disability benefits. This court has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 1331.
Both parties have moved for judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(c).
For the reasons stated below I grant the Secretary's motion and affirm the final determination that plaintiff was not disabled during the period he was eligible for disability benefits. Plaintiff's motion is denied. The Clerk is directed to close this case.
The relevant facts are undisputed. Plaintiff's last period of gainful employment was from November 1972 to May 1979 when he worked as a security aide in a psychiatric center. This job was physically demanding requiring him to walk a great deal and to physically restrain patients who became violent.
In December 1976 plaintiff injured his left knee while trying to restrain a patient. In addition to this injury, while working at an annex for boys in 1972, plaintiff had injured and had surgery on his right knee.
Plaintiff first filed an application for disability insurance benefits on July 24, 1979 asserting that by May 31, 1979 he was unable to walk or stand for any period of time due to knee injuries and was therefore entitled to disability benefits. On September 13, 1979 the Secretary determined that plaintiff was not disabled because although unable to return to his past work as a security aide due to its physical demands, he was able to work a sedentary position which required only sitting and light lifting.
The Secretary denied the plaintiff's 1992 application for disability on the same grounds the 1979 application was denied, that plaintiff was able to perform sedentary work on or before December 31, 1985 and was therefore not "disabled" within the definition of the Social Security Law.
The Secretary based the "not disabled" determination on the medical reports of D. Jeyamitra (report dated May 10, 1992), M. Kamalian (report dated July 1, 1992), Arden Hill Hospital (reports covering period from March 22, 1978 to April 7, 1990), and R. Stoller (reports dated September 26, 1978 and May 1, 1979).
That part of Dr. Jeyamitra's report relating to the plaintiff's condition between 1979 and 1985 stated that plaintiff had surgery on his knees in 1972 and 1979. Dr. Kamalian, the plaintiff's treating physician, stated that plaintiff cannot presently "engage in fruitful activities" due to a limited range of motion of both knees. Dr. Kamalian, however, gives no information as to the plaintiff's medical condition between 1979 and 1985 and, more importantly, whether he would have ...