Not what you're
looking for? Try an advanced search.
Layson v. Berryhill
United States District Court, D. Maryland
February 21, 2018
Thomas A. Layson
v.
Commissioner, Social Security Administration
Dear
Counsel:
See
See
Craig v. Chater
76 F.3d 585
Mr.
Layson protectively filed his claims for DIB and SSI on
October 2, 2012 and October 15, 2012, respectively. (Tr.
162-66, 177-82). He alleged a disability onset date of
September 15, 2008. (Tr. 175, 177). His claims were denied
initially and on reconsideration. (Tr. 71-84, 85-104). A
hearing was held on July 27, 2015, before an Administrative
Law Judge (“ALJ”). (Tr. 39-70). Following the
hearing, the ALJ determined that Mr. Layson was not disabled
within the meaning of the Social Security Act during the
relevant time frame. (Tr. 17-38). The Appeals Council denied
Mr. Layson's request for review, (Tr. 1-5), so the
ALJ's 2015 decision constitutes the final, reviewable
decision of the Agency.
On
appeal, Mr. Layson argues that the ALJ erroneously assessed
his RFC by: (1) failing to order a consultative examination
to obtain an opinion regarding his physical limitations; and
(2) failing to include mental limitations, despite
acknowledging that he suffers from an affective disorder.
[ECF No. 20-1 at 9-15]. These arguments are addressed below.
Id.
Monroe v. Colvin
826 F.3d 176
Clifford v. Apfel
227 F.3d 863
as amended
Sheppard v. Comm'r, Soc. Sec.
...