520 F. App'x 948
11th Cir.2013Background
- Jacobs appeals a magistrate judge’s affirmation of an ALJ denial of DIB and partial SSI under the Social Security Act.
- The ALJ found Jacobs has major depressive disorder with moderate concentration/persistence/pace difficulty.
- The ALJ limited Jacobs to one-to-three step non-complex tasks in the mental RFC.
- The VE testified that many jobs existed in the national economy before December 12, 2008.
- The ALJ concluded Jacobs was not disabled before December 12, 2008, and disabled only as of that date.
- Jacobs contends the hypothetical to the VE did not account for his moderate limitations, and seeks reversal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the hypothetical to the VE adequately accounted for concentration, persistence, and pace. | Jacobs argues Winschel requires accounting for all limitations. | The questions included one-to-three step non-complex tasks reflecting limits. | Yes; the hypothetical accounted for limits and is supported. |
| Whether substantial evidence supports the pre-December 12, 2008 non-disability finding. | Jacobs argues the VE testimony and evidence were incomplete. | The record shows substantial evidence supporting the pre-date non-disability finding. | Yes; substantial evidence supports the pre-date determination. |
| Whether the ALJ properly applied the five-step framework and mental impairment procedures. | Jacobs contends improper application of steps and techniques. | ALJ properly followed the five-step analysis and SSR 96-8p reasoning. | Yes; procedures followed and findings supported. |
Key Cases Cited
- Winschel v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 631 F.3d 1176 (11th Cir. 2011) (must account for limitations in concentration, persistence, or pace; incomplete hypotheticals invalid)
- Crawford v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 363 F.3d 1155 (11th Cir. 2004) (legal standard for reviewing SSA determinations)
- Moore v. Barnhart, 405 F.3d 1208 (11th Cir. 2005) (special technique for evaluating mental impairment in RFC)
- Ellison v. Barnhart, 355 F.3d 1272 (11th Cir. 2003) (disability evaluation burden and statutory framework)
- Dyer v. Barnhart, 395 F.3d 1206 (11th Cir. 2005) (substantial evidence review standard for SSA decisions)
- Lewis v. Callahan, 125 F.3d 1436 (11th Cir. 1997) (treatment of RFC and mental impairment analysis)