Ferrante v. Astrue
755 F. Supp. 2d 206
D. Me.2010Background
- Ferrante appeals a Social Security disability/SSI decision denying benefits, with the matter reviewed de novo by a district judge after a magistrate judge's recommended decision.
- ALJ found Ferrante insured through September 30, 2008, with impairments including knee degenerative changes, cervical spine issues, obesity, and lateral epicondylitis, non-severe as a group but severe enough to affect RFC.
- RFC limited Ferrante to lifting/carrying 10 pounds frequently and 20 pounds occasionally, sitting/standing/walking six hours total, occasional foot-controls use, occasional climbing, and frequent non-specific limitations; required avoidance of ladders/scaffolds/ropes, unprotected heights, and continuous fingering, with fixed head/neck positioning for up to one hour before breaks.
- ALJ concluded Ferrante could not perform past work but could perform other work, applying the Medical-Vocational Grid with a vocational expert for cashier II, finding work exists in the national economy.
- Ferrante challenged whether the ALJ properly evaluated Dr. Graf’s exam, medication side effects, mental limitations from Dr. Rothstein, epicondylitis, and the cashier II job’s GED reasoning level under the Grid.
- The district court affirmed, adopting the magistrate judge’s recommendation to uphold the commissioner's decision.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the ALJ properly evaluated Dr. Graf's report | Ferrante argues ALJ improperly rejected Graf and relied on own medical views | Commissioner contends ALJ had substantial evidence to reject Graf's conclusions based on later imaging | No error; ALJ adequately supported rejection with substantial evidence |
| Whether the ALJ properly addressed medication side effects | ALJ usurped medical authority by approving side effects without sufficient evidence | RFC accounted for adverse side effects via routine, repetitive tasks and daily living evidence | No reversible error; limitations tied to routine tasks supported by record |
| Whether the ALJ properly handled mental limitations from Dr. Rothstein | Failure to state weight given to Dr. Rothstein's moderate social impairment requires remand | ALJ's RFC already includes related limitation to routine, repetitive tasks; Ruling RR 96-9p not controlling here | Harmless error; no remand required |
| Whether the RFC adequately accounted for right lateral epicondylitis | ALJ did not adopt Graf's reaching limitation tied to epicondylitis and should have mandated further medical review | Record showed variable findings; ALJ rejected Graf's epicondylitis limitations as unsupported | No error; ALJ reasonably rejected Graf's epicondylitis-based reaching limitation |
| Whether reliance on cashier II job complies with Grid constraints given GED level | Limitation to routine, repetitive tasks conflicts with GED level 3 for cashier II; Prescott should be withdrawn | Court should evaluate case on its own terms; GED level discussion not controlling here | Court rejects withdrawal of Prescott; cashier II testimony analyzed without assuming GED level 3 |
Key Cases Cited
- Richardson v. Perales, 402 U.S. 389 (U.S. 1971) (substantial evidence standard)
- Goodermote v. Secretary of Health & Human Servs., 690 F.2d 5 (1st Cir. 1982) (burden on Commissioner at Step 5; substantial evidence standard)
- McDonald v. Secretary of Health & Human Services, 795 F.2d 1118 (1st Cir. 1986) (de minimis Step 2 burden; screening of claims)
- Rosado v. Secretary of Health & Human Servs., 807 F.2d 292 (1st Cir. 1986) (application of grid rules and vocational evidence)
- Dudley v. Secretary of Health & Human Servs., 816 F.2d 792 (1st Cir. 1987) (listing/medical equivalence framework in denial decisions)