Reilly v. Astrue

Filing 22

MEMORANDUM DECISION that the Administrative Law Judge decision entered April 28, 2009, is reversed and the case remanded for proper development in accordance with this Memorandum Decision and Order. Signed by Magistrate Judge Brooke C. Wells on 10/18/2011. (asp)

_____________________________________________________________________
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DIVISION, DISTRICT OF UTAH
_____________________________________________________________________

SANDRA K. REILLY,
Plaintiff,

:

MICHAEL ASTRUE, in his capacity as
Commissioner of Social Security
Administration,

Civil No. 2:11-cv-00183

:

vs.

:

MEMORANDUM DECISION &
ORDER

:
MAGISTRATE JUDGE BROOKE C.
WELLS

Defendant.
_____________________________________________________________________

This matter came for hearing on October 6, 2011, before United States
Magistrate Judge Brooke Wells.1 Plaintiff was represented by Michael E. Bulson of
Utah Legal Services. Defendant was represented by Robert L. Van Saghi, Special
Assistant United States Attorney. The court, having read the briefs filed in the case and
having heard oral argument, now makes the following decision and order.
This is an appeal from a decision by an Administrative Law Judge entered April
28, 2009, finding Ms. Reilly not disabled for purposes of Social Security Income.2

1

Document Number 21.

2

Document Number 11-2.

The ALJ found plaintiff capable of a limited range of light work, but failed to
engage in any functional assessment of her limitations and work-related abilities as
prescribed by Social Security Ruling SSR 96-8p.3 Such failure makes it impossible for
this court to determine whether the ALJ’s findings are supported by substantial
evidence. Additionally, the ALJ failed to assess the frequency of Ms. Reilly’s need to
alternate between sitting and standing.
For these reasons the Court enters the following order:
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Administrative Law Judge decision entered
April 28, 2009, is reversed and the case remanded for proper development in
accordance with this Memorandum Decision and Order.
DATED this 18th day of October, 2011.

BY THE COURT:

______________________
Brooke C. Wells
United States Magistrate Judge

SSR 96-8p requires that work related abilities be assessed on a function-byfunction basis. Specifically, “[a]t step five of the sequential evaluation process, RFC
must be expressed in terms of, or related to, the exertional categories when the
adjudicator determines whether there is other work the individual can do. However, in
order for an individual to do a full range of work at a given exertional level, such as
sedentary, the individual must be able to perform substantially all of the exertional and
nonexertional functions required in work at that level. Therefore, it is necessary to
assess the individual’s capacity to perform each of these functions in order to decide
which exertional level is appropriate and whether the individual is capable of doing the
full range of work contemplated by the exertional level.”
3

2

3