Clay v. Commissioner of Social Security
6:16-cv-00108
W.D. La.Sep 11, 2017Background
- Rodney Renell Clay applied for DIB and SSI alleging disability from April 19, 2013; ALJ Latham denied benefits in a Nov. 24, 2014 decision and the Appeals Council declined review; district court review followed.
- Relevant impairments: history of right knee meniscus tear and lumbar disc herniation from a 2007 work injury; complaints of back, left hip, and knee pain; conservative treatment and pain medications through 2013–2014; consultative exam showed mostly intact strength and mild range‑of‑motion deficits.
- ALJ found Clay unable to perform past relevant work but retained capacity for light work with certain postural limits and therefore concluded jobs exist in the national economy (step five), so not disabled.
- Clay argued the ALJ improperly discounted his subjective complaints (credibility), failed to properly consider his borderline age (within ~3 months of age 55), and that the Appeals Council should have credited post‑decision 2015 hip x‑rays as new and material.
- The magistrate judge recommended reversal and remand under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) because the ALJ did not adequately address the borderline‑age issue; the Appeals Council’s rejection of the 2015 x‑rays was upheld as they related to a later period.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Credibility of subjective complaints | Clay: ALJ erred in discounting his pain and limitations given work/medical history | ALJ: properly evaluated testimony against medical records and conservative treatment; substantial evidence supports credibility finding | ALJ’s credibility assessment upheld — ALJ considered evidence and explained reasons for discounting symptoms |
| Borderline‑age rule (50s categories) | Clay: was within months of turning 55; ALJ should have considered using older age category (advanced age) which could yield disability under the grids | ALJ: relied on Medical‑Vocational Rules and VE testimony (though VE not asked about age) and applied grid outcome favoring non‑disability | Remand required — ALJ failed to show she considered borderline‑age issue; record insufficient to confirm age category decision |
| Appeals Council new evidence (2015 x‑rays) | Clay: post‑decision left hip x‑rays showing marked osteoarthritis were new, material, and related to the adjudicated period | AC: x‑rays are about a later time and do not affect whether claimant was disabled on or before Nov. 24, 2014 | AC’s rejection affirmed — 2015 evidence reflects later deterioration and would not have changed ALJ’s decision for period at issue |
| RFC / Step Five reliance on VE and grids | Clay: ALJ’s step‑five finding relied on grids without proper consideration of age/transferable skills | ALJ: applied Light RFC and cited grids; VE testified regarding past jobs under hypothetical but not asked about age | Remand on age issue may affect step‑five analysis; RFC itself otherwise supported by record evidence |
Key Cases Cited
- Villa v. Sullivan, 895 F.2d 1019 (5th Cir.) (standard for substantial evidence review)
- Martinez v. Chater, 64 F.3d 172 (5th Cir.) (scope of judicial review of SSA decisions)
- Chambliss v. Massanari, 269 F.3d 520 (5th Cir.) (ALJ credibility determinations entitled to deference)
- Bowie v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 539 F.3d 395 (5th Cir.) (ALJ must consider borderline‑age issue; record must show consideration)
- Sun v. Colvin, 793 F.3d 502 (5th Cir.) (Appeals Council must consider new and material evidence relating to period on or before ALJ decision)
- Lenoir v. Apfel, 234 F.3d 29 (5th Cir.) (remand not required for new evidence showing subsequent deterioration)