United States District Court, M.D. North Carolina
TAMMY S. KENEDY, Plaintiff,
NANCY A. BERRYHILL, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED
STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Patrick Auld United States Magistrate Judge.
Tammy S. Kenedy, brought this action pursuant to the Social
Security Act (the “Act”) to obtain judicial
review of a final decision of Defendant, the Acting
Commissioner of Social Security, denying Plaintiff's
claim for Disability Insurance Benefits (“DIB”)
and Supplemental Security Income (“SSI”). (Docket
Entry 2.) Defendant has filed the certified administrative
record (Docket Entry 9 (cited herein as
“Tr.__”)), and both parties have moved for
judgment (Docket Entries 12, 16; see also Docket
Entry 13 (Plaintiff's Brief), Docket Entry 17
(Defendant's Memorandum)). For the reasons that follow,
the Court should enter judgment for Defendant.
applied for DIB and SSI, alleging an onset date of August 3,
2011. (Tr. 226-39.) Upon denial of those applications
initially (Tr. 133-54, 181-85) and on reconsideration (Tr.
155-80, 190-205), Plaintiff requested a hearing de novo
before an Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) (Tr.
206-07). Plaintiff, her attorney, and a vocational expert
(“VE”) attended the hearing. (Tr. 60-112.) The
ALJ subsequently ruled that Plaintiff did not qualify as
disabled under the Act. (Tr. 10-34.) The Appeals Council
thereafter denied Plaintiff's request for review (Tr.
1-6, 7-9, 305-06), making the ALJ's ruling the
Commissioner's final decision for purposes of judicial
rendering that disability determination, the ALJ made the
following findings later adopted by the Commissioner:
1. [Plaintiff] meets the insured status requirements of the .
. . Act through December 31, 2016.
2. [Plaintiff] has not engaged in substantial gainful
activity since August 3, 2011, the alleged onset date.
3. [Plaintiff] has the following severe impairments: asthma,
curvature of the spine; obesity; gastroesophageal reflux
disease (GERD); and anemia.
4. [Plaintiff] does not have an impairment or combination of
impairments that meets or medically equals the severity of
one of the listed impairments in 20 CFR Part 404, Subpart P,
5. . . . [Plaintiff] has the residual functional capacity to
perform sedentary work . . . . She can lift, carry, push, and
pull 10 pounds occasionally; stand and walk two hours in an
eight-hour workday; sit six hours in an eight-hour workday;
occasionally climb ramps and stairs; never climb ladders and
scaffolds; frequently balance, stoop, kneel, crouch, and
crawl. She can have no concentrated exposure to unprotected
heights, moving mechanical parts, humidity and wetness,
extreme cold or extreme heat, and dust, odors, fumes, and
6. [Plaintiff] is unable to perform any past relevant work.
10. Considering [Plaintiff's] age, education, work
experience, and residual functional capacity, there are jobs
that exist in significant numbers in the national economy
that [she] can perform.
11. [Plaintiff] has not been under a disability, as defined
in the . . . Act, from August 3, 2011, through the date of
(Tr. 15-33 (bold font and internal parenthetical citations
law “authorizes judicial review of the Social Security
Commissioner's denial of social security benefits.”
Hines v. Barnhart, 453 F.3d 559, 561 (4th Cir.
2006). However, “the scope of [the Court's] review
of [such a] decision . . . is extremely limited.”
Frady v. Harris, 646 F.2d 143, 144 (4th Cir. 1981).