Elena Jones v. Nancy Berryhill
681 F. App'x 252
| 4th Cir. | 2017Background
- Elena Jones (50) applied for Social Security disability and SSI, alleging disabling back/spine problems (disc degeneration, herniation, sciatica) and asthma; she uses a cane.
- Her claims were denied administratively; an ALJ held a hearing and found severe impairments (asthma, degenerative disc disease, obesity) but no disability.
- At Step 3 the ALJ found Jones did not meet or equal Listing 1.04 (spinal disorders), reasoning there was no documented motor/sensory/reflex loss and she could ambulate effectively.
- The ALJ assigned little weight to a certified physician assistant (PA) Brandon Soule’s opinion, finding it internally inconsistent, unsupported by objective record evidence, and noting a PA is not an "acceptable medical source."
- The ALJ concluded Jones had a reduced sedentary residual functional capacity, could not perform past work but could perform other jobs in the national economy; the district court affirmed and Jones appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether ALJ erred at Step 3 by failing to find Listing 1.04 met or equaled | Jones: ALJ failed to treat Listing 1.04(A),(B),(C) as alternative routes and did not adequately explain rejection of listing criteria | Commissioner: ALJ applied correct legal standard and identified which listing criteria lacked support in the record | Court: Affirmed — ALJ adequately explained Step 3; substantial evidence that Jones lacked required motor/sensory/reflex loss and did not have inability to ambulate effectively (single cane use insufficient) |
| Whether ALJ improperly discounted PA Soule’s opinion | Jones: ALJ did not sufficiently explain weight given and failed to follow SSR 06-3p regarding "other source" evidence | Commissioner: ALJ permissibly gave little weight because Soule’s opinion was internally inconsistent and unsupported by objective evidence | Court: Affirmed — ALJ adequately considered Soule’s report, explained reasons for little weight, and substantial evidence supports that decision |
Key Cases Cited
- Radford v. Colvin, 734 F.3d 288 (4th Cir.) (explains that a claimant must show each listed criterion is documented but need not show all simultaneously)
- Mascio v. Colvin, 780 F.3d 632 (4th Cir.) (appellate review standard: affirm if ALJ applied correct legal standards and factual findings are supported by substantial evidence)
- Sullivan v. Zebley, 493 U.S. 521 (U.S.) (an impairment must meet all criteria of a listing to qualify)