Walker v. Kijakazi

1 Citing case

  1. Curlee v. Kijakazi

    8:22-cv-1697-CPT (M.D. Fla. Sep. 28, 2023)   Cited 1 times

    Without such an explanation, the Court cannot discern whether substantial evidence buttresses the ALJ's conclusion that Dr. Sareen's assessments were unpersuasive. See Hanna v. Astrue, 395 Fed.Appx. 634, 636 (11th Cir. 2010) (per curiam) (“The ALJ must state the grounds for his decision with clarity to enable [the court] to conduct meaningful review.”); Brown v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec., 2021 WL 2917562, at *4 (M.D. Fla. July 12, 2021) (noting that when evaluating medical opinions under the new Regulations, the ALJ must “explain his decision, particularly with respect to supportability and consistency”) (citation omitted); Walker v. Kijakazi, 2022 WL 3686707, at *5 (N.D. Fla. July 25, 2022) (stating that an ALJ's articulation of consistency and supportability must allow the court to undertake a “meaningful review” of whether the ALJ's reasoning was properly substantiated by the record) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted), report and recommendation adopted, 2022 WL 3684609 (N.D. Fla. Aug. 25, 2022); Spaar v. Kijakazi, 2021 WL 6498838, at *4 (S.D. Ga. Dec. 28, 2021) (“The ALJ is completely silent on the ‘supportability' of [the medical] opinion, which is plainly an error[.]”), report and recommendation adopted, 2022 WL 141613 (S.D. Ga. Jan. 14, 2022).