Not what you're
looking for? Try an advanced search.
Buy This Entire Record For
Jeffrey C. Stelter v. Carolyn W. Colvin
April 19, 2013
JEFFREY C. STELTER, PLAINTIFF,
CAROLYN W. COLVIN, ACTING COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, DEFENDANT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Gary L. Sharpe Chief Judge
MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Jeffrey C. Stelter challenges the Commissioner of Social Security's denial of his claim for a period of disability and Disability Insurance Benefits (DIB), seeking judicial review under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). (See Compl., Dkt. No. 1.) After reviewing the administrative record and carefully considering Stelter's arguments, the court affirms the Commissioner's decision and dismisses the Complaint.
On March 12, 2008, Stelter filed an application for DIB under the
Social Security Act ("the Act"), alleging disability since December
31, 2004. (See Tr.*fn1 at 96, 139-42.)*fn2
After his application was denied, (see id. at 98-103),
Stelter requested a hearing before an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ),
which was held on November 17, 2009. (See id. at 55-94, 104-05.) On
April 16, 2010, the ALJ issued an unfavorable decision denying the
requested benefits, which became the Commissioner's final
determination upon the Social Security Administration Appeals Council's denial of
review. (See id. at 12-17, 25-41.)
Stelter commenced the present action by filing his Complaint on January 19, 2012 wherein he sought review of the Commissioner's determination. (See generally Compl.) The Commissioner filed an answer and a certified copy of the administrative transcript. (See Dkt. Nos. 10, 11.) Each party, seeking judgment on the pleadings, filed a brief. (See Dkt. Nos. 13, 15.)
Stelter contends that the Commissioner's decision was the product of legal error and is unsupported by substantial evidence. (See Dkt. No. 13 at 9-20.) Specifically, Stelter claims that the ALJ: (1) committed error in determining his residual functional capacity (RFC) for non-exertional activities by improperly weighing the opinion evidence; and (2) improperly assessed his credibility. (See id.) The Commissioner counters that the appropriate legal standards were used by the ALJ and his decision is also supported by substantial evidence. (See Dkt. No. 15 at 4-12.)
The court adopts the parties' undisputed factual recitations. (See Dkt. No. 13 at 3-6; Dkt. No. 15 at 2.)
The standard for reviewing the Commissioner's final decision under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) is well established and will not be repeated here. For a full discussion of the standard and the five-step process by which the Commissioner evaluates whether a claimant is disabled under the Act, the court refers the parties to its previous decision in Christiana v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec. Admin., No. 1:05-CV-932, 2008 WL 759076, at *1-2 (N.D.N.Y. Mar. 19, 2008).
Buy This Entire Record For