United States District Court, E.D. Missouri, Eastern Division
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
A. ROSS, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
an action under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for judicial review
of the Commissioner of Social Security's final decision
denying Plaintiff Lisa Reminger's application for
supplemental security income benefits under Title XVI of the
Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1381, et seq.
For the reasons set forth below, the decision of the
Commissioner will be affirmed.
applied for disability insurance benefits and supplemental
security income benefits in November 2014, alleging
disability resulting from systemic lupus erythematosus
("lupus"), trigeminal neuralgia ("IN"),
Hashimoto's disease (causing hypothyroidism), and
arthritis. After her application was denied at the initial
administrative level, she requested a hearing before an
administrative law judge ("ALJ"). Following a
hearing on February 6, 2017, the ALJ issued a written
decision denying Plaintiffs application on March 6, 2017.
Plaintiffs request for review by the Appeals Council was
denied. Thus, the decision of the ALJ stands as the final
decision of the Commissioner. See Sims v. Apfel, 530
U.S. 103, 107 (2000).
Court adopts Plaintiffs Statement of Material Facts (Doc. No.
18-1) and Defendant's Statement of Additional Material
Facts (Doc. No. 23-2). The Court's review of the record
shows that the adopted facts are accurate and complete.
Specific facts will be discussed as part of the analysis.
court's role on judicial review is to determine whether
the ALJ's findings are supported by substantial evidence
in the record as a whole. Johnson v. Astrue, 628
F.3d 991, 992 (8th Cir. 2009). "Substantial evidence is
that which a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to
support a conclusion." Id. (citations omitted).
The court may not reverse merely because substantial evidence
exists in the record that would support a contrary outcome or
because the court would have decided the case differently.
See Krogmeier v. Barnhart, 294 F.3d 1019, 1022 (8th
determine whether the ALJ's final decision is supported
by substantial evidence, the Court is required to review the
administrative record as a whole and to consider:
(1) The findings of credibility made by the ALJ;
(2) The education, background, work history, and age of the
(3) The medical evidence given by the claimant's treating
(4) The subjective complaints of pain and description of the
claimant's physical activity and impairment;
(5) The corroboration by third parties of the claimant's
(6) The testimony of vocational experts based upon prior
hypothetical questions which fairly set forth the
claimant's physical impairment; and
(7) The testimony of consulting physicians.
Brand v. Sec'y of Dept. of Health, Educ. &
623 F.2d 523, 527 (8th Cir. ...