Solis v. Berryhill
692 F. App'x 46
| 2d Cir. | 2017Background
- Francisco Solis, pro se, appealed denial of Social Security disability insurance benefits for the period Sept. 1, 2009 (onset) to Sept. 30, 2009 (insured status end).
- ALJ found Solis not disabled and concluded he did not meet or equal a listed impairment; district court adopted the magistrate judge’s report and upheld the denial.
- Solis’s sole timely objection argued he met Listing 11.14 (peripheral neuropathy); other arguments were not preserved before the district court.
- Evidence in the administrative record showed Solis performed work in 2009 (landscaper, machinist) and engaged in daily activities (home repairs, driving, using tractor) inconsistent with extreme or marked limitations.
- Solis submitted new medical records from 2015–2016 with his brief; the court found them not material to the 2009 insured period and therefore declined to remand.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether ALJ applied correct legal standards/substantial evidence supports denial | ALJ failed to address Listing 11.14 and erred in finding Solis not disabled | ALJ’s overall finding that Solis did not meet or equal a listing is supported by record evidence | Affirmed — ALJ applied correct standards and decision was supported by substantial evidence |
| Whether Solis met Listing 11.14 (peripheral neuropathy) | Solis alleged extreme/marked limitations consistent with Listing 11.14 | Record showed only intermittent/use-of-assistive-device-for-pain and functional activities inconsistent with Listing 11.14 | Denied — Solis did not meet or equal Listing 11.14 |
| Whether unobjected issues are waived on appeal | N/A (no timely objections) | Failure to object to magistrate judge’s report waived other claims | Waived — court declined to excuse waiver; no injustice shown to require reaching merits |
| Whether new post-2009 medical records warrant remand | New records show worsening condition and should be considered | New records are from 2015–2016, not probative of condition during insured period; not material | Denied — new evidence immaterial to 2009 period and remand not warranted |
Key Cases Cited
- Burgess v. Astrue, 537 F.3d 117 (2d Cir. 2008) (substantial-evidence standard and plenary review of administrative record)
- Brault v. Social Security Admin., 683 F.3d 443 (2d Cir. 2012) (deference to ALJ factfinding; reversal only if reasonable factfinder compelled otherwise)
- Berry v. Schweiker, 675 F.2d 464 (2d Cir. 1982) (absence of express rationale does not bar upholding ALJ when record supports conclusion)
- Sullivan v. Zebley, 493 U.S. 521 (U.S. 1990) (claimant must show medical findings equal in severity to all criteria of comparable listed impairment)
- Tirado v. Bowen, 842 F.2d 595 (2d Cir. 1988) (standards for remand based on new evidence: new, material, and good cause)
- Pollard v. Halter, 377 F.3d 183 (2d Cir. 2004) (new evidence must disclose severity/continuity of impairments before insured date to be material)
- Lisa v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 940 F.2d 40 (2d Cir. 1991) (same principle regarding new evidence and materiality)
- United States v. Male Juvenile, 121 F.3d 34 (2d Cir. 1997) (failure to timely object to magistrate judge report may operate as waiver if warned of consequences)