Nunez v. Commissioner of Social Security, 1:16-cv-03917

Plaintiff Yaneira Nunez (pro se) applied for Disability Insurance Benefits and SSI in October 2012, alleging disabling lumbar herniated/ruptured discs with an alleged onset of April 30, 2012 and a closed period through September 1, 2013.
Medical records (MRIs April–Aug 2012) showed L3–L4 herniation and L4–L5 bulge; consultative examiner Dr. Corvalan (Nov 2012) found mild–moderate limitations but normal strength and no sensory deficit.
Plaintiff received conservative treatment (medications, physical therapy referrals), underwent abdominoplasty/liposuction in April 2013, and returned to tutoring and later data-entry work during the claimed period.
A vocational expert testified that a person with light exertional limits and only occasional postural activities could perform plaintiff’s past jobs and other work in the national economy.
ALJ Elias Feuer applied the five-step SSA analysis, found plaintiff not disabled for the relevant period, gave great weight to the consultative examiner, discounted subjective severity of symptoms as inconsistent with treatment and objective findings, and concluded jobs existed that she could perform.
District court (Castel, S.D.N.Y.) granted defendant’s Rule 12(c) motion, affirming the Commissioner because the ALJ applied correct legal standards and substantial evidence supported the decision.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether ALJ’s denial is supported by substantial evidence	Nunez contends the ALJ erred and the record shows disabling back impairment	ALJ’s findings are supported by objective imaging, consultative exam, conservative treatment, and VE testimony	Court held substantial evidence supports ALJ’s decision; denial affirmed
Weight given to medical opinions (treating vs consultative)	Plaintiff argued treating records show disabling limitations	Commissioner relied on consultative examiner and treating notes showing conservative care and normal findings	Court accepted ALJ’s reasoned assignment of great weight to consultative opinion and consistency with record
Credibility of subjective pain complaints	Nunez asserts pain and functional limits precluded work	Commissioner argued statements inconsistent with medical notes, conservative treatment, and return to work	Court upheld ALJ’s credibility finding that claimant’s symptom statements were not entirely credible
Step 5 / vocational capacity and other work in economy	Nunez maintains she cannot perform work in national economy	Commissioner presented VE testimony identifying past work and alternate jobs consistent with RFC	Court accepted VE testimony and held claimant could perform past and other substantial jobs

Halloran v. Barnhart, 362 F.3d 28 (2d Cir.) (standard: no de novo review; substantial evidence governs)
Shaw v. Chater, 221 F.3d 126 (2d Cir.) (allocation of burdens in five-step analysis)
Tejada v. Apfel, 167 F.3d 770 (2d Cir.) (review requires checking legal standards and substantial evidence)
Richardson v. Perales, 402 U.S. 389 (Sup. Ct.) (definition of substantial evidence)
Lesterhuis v. Colvin, 805 F.3d 83 (2d Cir.) (definition and application of substantial evidence)
Veino v. Barnhart, 312 F.3d 578 (2d Cir.) (ALJ resolves evidentiary conflicts and credibility)
Perez v. Chater, 77 F.3d 41 (2d Cir.) (ALJ’s duty to develop record in non-adversarial proceedings)
Clark v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 143 F.3d 115 (2d Cir.) (treating physician rule and requirement to give good reasons for discounting)
Diaz v. Shalala, 59 F.3d 307 (2d Cir.) (chiropractor opinions not medical opinions under SSA rules)
Snell v. Apfel, 177 F.3d 128 (2d Cir.) (ALJ may assess credibility of subjective pain)
Dumas v. Schweiker, 712 F.2d 1545 (2d Cir.) (pain can constitute disability if derived from medically determinable impairment)
Green-Younger v. Barnhart, 335 F.3d 99 (2d Cir.) (treating physician controlling-weight framework)
Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438 (Sup. Ct.) (standard for in forma pauperis good-faith appeals)