Michelson v. Kijakazi

Background

Irma Guadalupe Michelson challenged an administrative law judge’s decision denying her Social Security benefits. The Acting Social Security Commissioner acknowledged that the decision could not be affirmed because the administrative law judge did not properly evaluate the medical opinion evidence and prior administrative medical findings.

The administrative law judge also relied on Michelson’s failure to seek treatment for extended periods in 2013 and 2014 when discounting her testimony about the severity and persistence of her symptoms. The court stated that limited treatment can have many explanations and that ambiguous evidence creates a duty to develop the record further.

Ruling

The court remanded the case to the Commissioner for further proceedings. It directed that the administrative law judge reevaluate the medical opinions and prior administrative medical findings and further develop the record concerning Michelson’s treatment history.

The court denied Michelson’s request for a remand ordering an award of benefits because the record required additional development and essential factual issues remained unresolved. The court noted that this was the second time the Commissioner had agreed to remand the case because of legal error, and stated that another legal error after full development of the record could lead the court to consider ordering an award of benefits rather than another remand for proceedings.

Judge Alex G. Tse granted Michelson’s motion for summary judgment, denied the Commissioner’s motion for summary judgment, vacated the administrative law judge’s October 19, 2021 decision denying benefits, and remanded the case to the Commissioner for further proceedings.