Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 20 views

    Serrano v. SHHS, 1st Cir. (1993)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document summarizes a 1993 appellate court case regarding Rafael Ramos-Serrano's appeal of the denial of his social security disability benefits claim. The court affirmed the lower court's ruling, agreeing with the administrative law judge and magistrate judge that the claimant did not provide sufficient evidence that he was disabled. Specifically, the court found that the administrative law judge properly rejected medical evaluations and capacity reports submitted by the claimant, as they were either contradicted by other evidence or solely based on the claimant's subjective reports rather than objective medical findings. The court concluded that even if the claimant did experience dizzy spells as alleged, the administrative law judge reasonably relied on the medical advisor's determination that they were not severely disabling.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content

    You might also like

    Serrano v. SHHS, 1st Cir. (1993)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    20 views3 pages
    This document summarizes a 1993 appellate court case regarding Rafael Ramos-Serrano's appeal of the denial of his social security disability benefits claim. The court affirmed the lower court's ruling, agreeing with the administrative law judge and magistrate judge that the claimant did not provide sufficient evidence that he was disabled. Specifically, the court found that the administrative law judge properly rejected medical evaluations and capacity reports submitted by the claimant, as they were either contradicted by other evidence or solely based on the claimant's subjective reports rather than objective medical findings. The court concluded that even if the claimant did experience dizzy spells as alleged, the administrative law judge reasonably relied on the medical advisor's determination that they were not severely disabling.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1993-06-01 Precedential Status: Precedential Docket: 92-2308

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    This document summarizes a 1993 appellate court case regarding Rafael Ramos-Serrano's appeal of the denial of his social security disability benefits claim. The court affirmed the lower court's ruling, agreeing with the administrative law judge and magistrate judge that the claimant did not provide sufficient evidence that he was disabled. Specifically, the court found that the administrative law judge properly rejected medical evaluations and capacity reports submitted by the claimant, as they were either contradicted by other evidence or solely based on the claimant's subjective reports rather than objective medical findings. The court concluded that even if the claimant did experience dizzy spells as alleged, the administrative law judge reasonably relied on the medical advisor's determination that they were not severely disabling.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    20 views3 pages

    Serrano v. SHHS, 1st Cir. (1993)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document summarizes a 1993 appellate court case regarding Rafael Ramos-Serrano's appeal of the denial of his social security disability benefits claim. The court affirmed the lower court's ruling, agreeing with the administrative law judge and magistrate judge that the claimant did not provide sufficient evidence that he was disabled. Specifically, the court found that the administrative law judge properly rejected medical evaluations and capacity reports submitted by the claimant, as they were either contradicted by other evidence or solely based on the claimant's subjective reports rather than objective medical findings. The court concluded that even if the claimant did experience dizzy spells as alleged, the administrative law judge reasonably relied on the medical advisor's determination that they were not severely disabling.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 3

    USCA1 Opinion

    June 1, 1993
    [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
    ____________________
    No. 92-2308
    RAFAEL RAMOS-SERRANO,
    Plaintiff, Appellant,
    v.
    SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES,
    Defendant, Appellee.
    ____________________
    APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
    FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO
    [Hon. Raymond L. Acosta, U.S. District Judge]
    ___________________
    ____________________
    Before
    Breyer, Chief Judge,
    ___________
    Torruella and Cyr, Circuit Judges.
    ______________
    ____________________

    Raymond Rivera Esteves and Juan A. Hernandez Rivera on brief


    ______________________
    _________________________
    appellant.
    Daniel F. Lopez-Romo,
    United States Attorney, Jose Vazq
    ______________________
    __________
    Garcia, Assistant United States Attorney, and Jessie M. Kly
    ______
    _______________
    Assistant Regional Counsel, Region I, Department of Health and Hu
    Services, on brief for appellee.
    ____________________
    ____________________

    Per Curiam.
    __________

    We have

    reviewed the parties'

    briefs and

    the record on appeal.

    We affirm the judgment of the district

    court,

    dated October

    1, 1992,

    stated

    in the magistrate

    essentially for

    the reasons

    judge's report and recommendation,

    dated July 28, 1992.


    We need

    add only the

    following comments.

    Contrary to

    the claimant's contention, the administrative law judge (ALJ)


    did not
    (RFC)

    fail to

    address

    the residual

    report of Dr. Castrodad,

    the hearing on

    functional

    dated October 30,

    May 8, 1990, the ALJ pointed

    contradicted by the

    testimony of the

    capacity
    1985.

    At

    out that it was

    medical advisor

    (MA).

    Furthermore, for the most part, that RFC appears based on the
    subjective complaints of the claimant, as Dr. Castrodad's own

    examination

    found

    muscles" and,
    only

    only

    as to

    "tenderness

    inability to

    do work,

    paravertebral
    Dr. Castrodad's

    comment was that the claimant not do any work requiring

    the handling of food.

    The RFC report of Dr.

    May 22, 1987, (well beyond


    insured
    based

    along

    Cestero, dated

    the expiration of the

    claimant's

    status, we add) was also properly rejected by ALJ as


    solely on claimant's own

    Cestero, herself,

    report of his

    history.

    Dr.

    reported that her examination of claimant,

    as well as the x-rays, were negative.


    We also conclude that, even if as claimant contends,
    had recurring

    dizzy spells, the

    ALJ could properly

    he

    rely on

    theMA's determinationthat theywere notof adisabling severity.


    Affirmed.
    ________

    You might also like