Maldonado v. Commissioner of Social Security

Background

Inocensio Maldonado sought review under the Social Security Act of the Commissioner of Social Security’s decision denying his application for Supplemental Security Income. Maldonado claimed disability primarily because of back injuries. The administrative law judge found that he had severe back and neck impairments, but determined that he could perform a limited range of sedentary work. Although he could not perform his past work, the judge found at the fifth step of the disability analysis that he could perform three types of jobs identified by a vocational expert, totaling 12,241 jobs nationally.

Maldonado initially appeared without a lawyer at the administrative hearing and when he appealed to the Administration’s Appeals Council. He later filed this federal case without a lawyer, and counsel appeared during the federal proceedings. After the administrative law judge issued the decision, a December 2020 MRI showed bilateral defects at L5, grade 1 slippage of L5 on S1, moderate to severe narrowing around the nerve openings, and pressure on both L5 nerve roots. The MRI was not part of the record considered by the administrative law judge or the Appeals Council.

Arguments and analysis

The Commissioner moved for judgment on the pleadings and asked the court to affirm the denial of benefits. Maldonado cross-moved for judgment on the pleadings, requested a remand for further consideration, and sought attorney’s fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act. Maldonado argued that the new MRI warranted a remand and separately challenged the number of jobs identified at the fifth step.

The court held that a remand for new evidence was appropriate under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). The MRI was new because it did not exist when the administrative hearing occurred. The court also found good cause for the delayed submission, noting that Maldonado had been proceeding without a lawyer, was living in a homeless shelter, and did not receive a copy of the report until he obtained representation. The court found the MRI material because it concerned the same spinal condition, showed more severe findings than the earlier evidence, and created a reasonable possibility that the Commissioner might reach a different decision about Maldonado’s ability to work.

The court rejected Maldonado’s separate challenge to the job numbers. It concluded that, under existing authority, 12,241 nationwide jobs satisfied the requirement that available work exist in significant numbers. The court expressed reservations about the age of the occupational listings and the reliability of the job-number source used by the vocational expert, but stated that Maldonado had not raised those issues and that the record did not support examining them further. The court noted that a new fifth-step analysis would be required if the administrative law judge changed the work-capacity finding after considering the MRI.

Disposition

Judge Robert W. Lehrburger denied the Commissioner’s motion, granted Maldonado’s motion, and remanded the case so the administrative law judge could consider the December 2020 MRI evidence. The court closed the federal case. The opinion did not decide that Maldonado was entitled to Supplemental Security Income, and its conclusion did not separately state a ruling on the request for attorney’s fees.