United States District Court, W.D. Oklahoma
CHARLOTTE L. WILKINS-BEAVER, Plaintiff,
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
SUZANNE MITCHELL UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.
L. Wilkins-Beaver (Plaintiff) brings this action for judicial
review of the Defendant Acting Commissioner of Social
Security's (Commissioner) final decision that she was not
“disabled” under the terms of the Social Security
Act. See 42 U.S.C. §§ 405(g),
423(d)(1)(A). The parties have consented under 28 U.S.C.
§ 636(c) to proceed before a United States Magistrate
Judge. Doc. 10.
careful review of the record, the parties' briefs, and
the relevant authority, the court affirms the
Commissioner's decision. See 42 U.S.C. §
Social Security Act defines “disability” as the
“inability to engage in any substantial gainful
activity by reason of any medically determinable physical or
mental impairment that can be expected to result in death or
which has lasted or can be expected to last for a continuous
period of not less than 12 months.” 42 U.S.C. §
423(d)(1)(A). “This twelve-month duration requirement
applies to the claimant's inability to engage in any
substantial gainful activity, and not just h[er] underlying
impairment.” Lax v. Astrue, 489 F.3d 1080,
1084 (10th Cir. 2007) (citing Barnhart v. Walton,
535 U.S. 212, 218-19 (2002)).
Burden of proof.
“bears the burden of establishing a disability”
and of “ma[king] a prima facie showing that [s]he can
no longer engage in h[er] prior work activity.”
Turner v. Heckler, 754 F.2d 326, 328 (10th Cir.
1985). If Plaintiff makes that prima facie showing, the
burden of proof then shifts to the Commissioner to show
Plaintiff retains the capacity to perform a different type of
work and that such a specific type of job exists in the
national economy. Id.
Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) findings.
assigned to Plaintiff's case applied the standard
regulatory analysis and concluded Plaintiff had not met her
burden of proof. AR 11-31; see 20 C.F.R. §
404.1520(a)(2); see also Wall v. Astrue, 561 F.3d
1048, 1052 (10th Cir. 2009) (describing the five-step
process). Specifically, and relevant to this action, the ALJ
(1) was severely impaired by migraine headaches, bipolar
disorder, obsessive compulsive disorder, and personality
(2) did not have an impairment or combination of impairments
that met or medically equaled the severity of a listed
(3) had the residual functional capacity (RFC) to perform
sedentary work with some limitations: she occasionally can
lift and/or carry and push and/or pull ten pounds and
frequently can lift and/or carry and push and/or pull less
than ten pounds; she can stand and/or walk for a total of two
hours in an eight-hour workday and can sit for a total of six
hours in an eight-hour workday; she cannot climb ladders,
ropes, or scaffolds, and cannot balance; she must avoid
exposure to unprotected heights and hazardous, unprotected
machinery; she can perform simple tasks with routine
supervision but cannot perform customer service work or have
any public contact; she can interact appropriately with
supervisors and co-workers on a superficial work basis and
can adapt to work situations;
(4) was unable to perform any past relevant work;
(5) was able to perform jobs existing in the national
economy; and so,
(6) had not been under a disability, as defined in the Social
Security Act, from March 31, 2012-her alleged onset of
disability date-through September 18, 2014, the date of the