Blake R. v. Berryhill

Background

Blake R. challenged the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration’s denial of his application for disability benefits. The record described several severe mental-health impairments, including Asperger’s syndrome or autism spectrum disorder, oppositional defiant disorder, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, depressive disorder, and anxiety disorder. Blake alleged that he became unable to work on June 1, 2014, shortly after turning 18. He had no relevant work history.

An administrative law judge (ALJ) denied Blake’s claim after a hearing. The ALJ found that Blake had severe mental impairments but retained the residual functional capacity (RFC)—the most he could do in a full-time job despite his impairments—to perform work at all physical exertion levels with restrictions involving routine, repetitive work, limited contact with others, a lower-than-average pace, and no production quotas or assembly-line work. Based on that RFC, the ALJ found that Blake could perform jobs such as laundry worker and cleaner and was not disabled under the Social Security Act.

Blake and the Commissioner filed cross-motions for summary judgment. Blake argued that the ALJ had failed to account for his functioning in a supportive living environment and had not properly addressed recommendations made by psychologist Amy Swingle, Psy.D., L.P.

Court’s analysis

The court held that the RFC was not supported by substantial evidence on the record as a whole. First, the ALJ did not adequately consider Blake’s need for a structured living environment, as required by Social Security Ruling 96-8p. Blake had received special education, an individualized education plan, and one-on-one assistance from a paraeducator throughout the school day. He had continued living at home, received substantial assistance from his mother, had not lived independently or managed his own finances, and had been appointed a legal guardian.

The court explained that the ALJ’s discussion of Blake’s activities did not show how his limited functioning in highly supported school and home settings would translate into the ability to perform full-time competitive work without comparable support. The court emphasized that a disability determination must address the ability to perform work-related activities regularly and continuously in the ordinary workplace, rather than only occasional activities performed in a supportive setting.

Second, the court found that the ALJ lacked substantial evidence for concluding that Blake’s hygiene and self-care problems had a “motivational component.” The medical and educational records documented persistent difficulty showering, brushing his teeth, changing clothing after accidents, using the toilet consistently, and maintaining personal hygiene. The court concluded that the records supported viewing these problems as symptoms of Blake’s mental impairments, including his fixation on video games, rather than as an unimpaired personal choice to neglect his hygiene.

Because the court required a new assessment of the RFC, it did not decide whether the ALJ had adequately evaluated Dr. Swingle’s recommendations. The court left it to the Social Security Administration to decide initially whether those recommendations needed to be reevaluated in light of the court’s conclusions.

Disposition

Judge Katherine Menendez granted Blake R.’s motion for summary judgment and denied the Commissioner’s motion for summary judgment. The court vacated the Commissioner’s conclusion denying Blake’s application and remanded the case to the Social Security Administration for further administrative action under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). The order did not award benefits; it required further proceedings.