DORSEY v. COLVIN

Filing 19

ORDER THAT THE CLERK SHALL REMOVE THE CASE FROM SUSPENSE. THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVED AND ADOPTED. PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST FOR REVIEW IS GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART AND THIS MATTER IS REMANDED TO THE COMMISSIONER FOR A NEW HEARING.. SIGNED BY HONORABLE CYNTHIA M. RUFE ON 10/2/2017. 10/3/2017 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED.(kp, )

FILED

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

OCT 03 2017
,., Kll\fE BAR1<lVIAN, Clerk
;.;-).',... "'·"""" ··-··,...,..,._,.Dep. Clerk

DENISE GERMAINE DORSEY,
Plaintiff,
v.

CIVIL ACTION NO. 16-5803

NANCY A. BERRYHILL*, ACTING
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY
Defendant.

ORDER
AND NOW, this 2nd day of October 2017, upon careful and independent consideration

of Plaintiff's Request for Review, the response and reply thereto, the administrative record, and
the Report and Recommendation ("R&R") of United States Magistrate Judge Jacob P. Hart, to
which no objections have been filed, it is hereby ORDERED that:
1. The Clerk is directed to REMOVE the case from Civil Suspense;
2. The R&R [Doc. No. 17] is APPROVED and ADOPTED for the reasons set forth
therein 1; and

•Substituted pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 25(d).
1

The Court agrees with the thorough and comprehensive R&R that the opinion of the Administrative Law Judge
("ALJ") erred in failing to address statements provided by Plaintiffs friend and family members in evaluating the
severity of Plaintiffs mental impairment. Here, the ALJ's omission is material because the ALJ assigned "little
weight" to the opinion of Plaintiffs treating mental health practitioners after concluding that it was "inconsistent
with the record as a whole," and the third-party lay witness statements, which corroborated the alleged duration and
intensity of Plaintiffs symptoms, were relevant to the balance of the evidence. Record at 21. On remand, the ALJ
should fully consider the third-party submissions alongside the medical opinion of Plaintiffs treating practitioners
and other evidence in the record.
The Court also agrees with the R&R that there was substantial evidence to support the ALJ's finding that Plaintiff
could sit/stand for up to four hours a day, and that the ALJ did not err in obtaining testimony from a vocational
expert to advise on the existence of jobs that accommodate the additional limitations that Plaintiff has on top of the
"unskilled light" occupational base. However, on remand, the ALJ should evaluate the cumulative effect of all of
Plaintiffs mental and physical impairments on her residual functional capacity.

--

----- "-----

------ · - - -

------

----

----

3. Plaintiffs Request for Review [Doc. No. 12] is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED
IN PART, and this matter is REMANDED to the Commissioner for a new hearing.
It is so ORDERED.

2