From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Barron v. Berryhill

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI SOUTHEASTERN DIVISION
Sep 7, 2017
Case No. 1:16-cv-00097-AGF (E.D. Mo. Sep. 7, 2017)

Opinion

Case No. 1:16-cv-00097-AGF

09-07-2017

CYNTHIA BARRON, Plaintiff, v. NANCY A. BERRYHILL, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant.


MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

This action is before this Court on Plaintiff's motion (ECF No. 22) to alter or amend judgment, based solely on the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit's decision in Gann v. Berryhill, No. 16-2168, 2017 WL 3197610, at *1 (8th Cir. July 28, 2017). The Court gave careful consideration to the arguments Plaintiff presented in her request for judicial review of the final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security, and asserts again now. The Court continues to believe that the Administrative Law Judge's ("ALJ") assessment of Plaintiff's residual functional capacity ("RFC") and the hypothetical questions he posed to the vocational expert ("VE"), including the implicit finding that Plaintiff had no reaching limitation, are supported by substantial evidence on the record as a whole. Cf. Gann, 2017 WL 3197610, at *4 (reversing and remanding the Commissioner's decision upon finding that "the ALJ's RFC assessment and hypothetical question to the VE did not contain all impairments supported by substantial evidence in the record"); see also McCoy v. Astrue, 648 F.3d 605, 615 (8th Cir. 2011) (concluding that, where the ALJ identified the proper legal framework and noted that she had taken into account all credible nonexertional limitations when determining the RFC, but did not make explicit findings regarding the claimant's ability to stoop, the ALJ "implicitly" found no stooping limitation, and as the only medical evidence suggesting a stooping limitation was in checkbox form and inconsistent with the record as a whole, substantial evidence supported the ALJ's implicit finding).

CONCLUSION

Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's motion to alter or amend the judgment is DENIED. ECF No. 22.

/s/_________

AUDREY G. FLEISSIG

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Dated on this 7th day of September, 2017


Summaries of

Barron v. Berryhill

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI SOUTHEASTERN DIVISION
Sep 7, 2017
Case No. 1:16-cv-00097-AGF (E.D. Mo. Sep. 7, 2017)
Case details for

Barron v. Berryhill

Case Details

Full title:CYNTHIA BARRON, Plaintiff, v. NANCY A. BERRYHILL, Acting Commissioner of…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI SOUTHEASTERN DIVISION

Date published: Sep 7, 2017

Citations

Case No. 1:16-cv-00097-AGF (E.D. Mo. Sep. 7, 2017)