Case law

Law v. Harrisburg Area Community College

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 6, 2021

The elements of a prima facie case of age discrimination are: (1) the plaintiff is at least forty years old; (2) the plaintiff suffered an adverse employment decision; (3) the plaintiff was qualified for the position in … Regardless, even if the Court were to credit Plaintiff’s assertions that he notified Stephen Ampersand of the incident (and therefore arguably complied with the harassment policy’s requirements), it is clearly established

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania Game Commission v. Thomas E. Proctor Heirs Trust

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 18, 2019

Unseated tax-sale procedures, moreover, were well established by 1908. … Even less sophisticated unseated landowners were likely aware of these well-established procedures.

Hernandez v. Saul

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 22, 2020

The claimant’s examination records further show she interacts appropriately and clearly despite her alleged social anxiety. … the ALJ remarked that the examination records show that Hernandez interacted appropriately and clearly despite her alleged social anxiety.

Maldonado Morales v. Kijakazi

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 23, 2023

Cir. 2011) (referencing 20 C.F.R. §404.1529(a) (“statements about your pain or other symptoms will not alone establish that you are disabled.”). … The burden is on the claimant to show that an impairment qualifies as severe. Applying these benchmarks, we find that the ALJ's step two evaluation in this case is supported by substantial evidence.

Jackson v. Direct Building Supplies LLC

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Jan 17, 2024

This email only adds context to support the plausibility that Jackson received calls from Direct Building Services, and is not actually necessary to establishing his TCPA claims. … July 5, July 19, August 1, and September 8, 2023.42 These calls, like the previous ones, followed a similar script advertising Direct Building Services’ solar products.43 Jackson states that “the calls were clearly

DeMarinis v. Anthem Insurance Companies, Inc.

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 7, 2025

Relative Merits of the Parties’ Position As to the fifth factor, Plaintiff avers that he “clearly had a more meritorious legal position that that of Anthem” in this action. (Doc. 63-1 at 6-7.) … Ct. of Common Pleas, 89 F.3d 1031 (3d Cir. 1996), the Third Circuit recognized that “[iJt is an established proposition of law that ‘[w]here the documentation of hours is inadequate, the district court may reduce the award

Werni v. Saul

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Nov 18, 2022

As the Court of Appeals has noted on this score: In Burnett, we held that an ALJ must clearly set forth the reasons for his decision. 220 F.3d at 119. … The burden is on the claimant to show that an impairment qualifies as severe. Bowen, 482 U.S. at 146, 107 S.Ct. 2287.

Mull v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 26, 2023

Admin.], we held that an ALJ must clearly set forth the reasons for his decision. 220 F.3d [112, 119 (3d Cir. 2000]. Conclusory statements . . . are insufficient. … It did not directly address whether that prior decision qualified as “evidence,” because the ALJ in Mattei addressed the prior ALJ’s findings and expressly found that they were only “partially” persuasive.

Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority v. Orrstown Financial Services, Inc.

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 18, 2022

The agency asserting the privilege has the burden of establishing its applicability to the documents at issue. … The agency asserting the privilege has the burden of establishing its applicability to the documents at issue.

DePalma v. Kilolo Kijakazi, Acting Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 10, 2023

First, when presented with a disputed factual record, it is well established that “[t]he ALJ – not treating or examining physicians or State agency consultants – must make the ultimate disability and RFC determinations … In other words, we determined that the finding of a qualified and disinterested tribunal that [the plaintiff in Lively] was capable of performing only light work as of a certain date was such an important

Bonilla v. Saul

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 22, 2022

An impairment that only meets some of the criteria of a listed impairment, “no matter how severely, does not qualify.” Sullivan v. Zebley, 493 U.S. 521, 530 (1990); see also Williams v. … “In a child's claim for benefits, an impairment is not severe if the evidence establishes no more than a minimal effect on a claimant's ability to function in an age-appropriate manner.”

Oliver v. Saul

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Jan 5, 2022

McNassor’s assessments qualify as material evidence. … Further, in setting the RFC, the ALJ must clearly articulate his or her reasoning. In other words, the ALJ must “set forth the reasons for his decision” to allow for meaningful judicial review.

Jackson v. Mason

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 30, 2025

Jackson believes that this “clearly shows” that his property was with security from December 29, 2021, until January 11, 2022. See (id. at 12–13). … Within thee [sic] initial review response, they clearly admitted I possessed 2 footlockers, and lied on me [sic] stating I’ll have my attorney’s [sic] replace the paperwork?

Nazario Vargas v. Saul

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 23, 2020

§404.1529(a) (“statements about your pain or other symptoms will not alone establish that you are disabled.”). … The burden is on the claimant to show that an impairment qualifies as severe. Bowen, 482 U.S. at 146. Here, we find that substantial evidence supports the ALJ’s Step 2 evaluation.

Vincent v. Saul

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 12, 2021

In response, the Commissioner argues: A claimant’s allegations alone will never establish that she is disabled. … limitation in interacting with co-workers, the RFC assessed by the ALJ restricts Plaintiff to only “occasional” interaction (2 hours or less of interaction with co-workers per eight- hour workday). 5 The ALJ further qualified

DAVIS v. WETZEL

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 23, 2021

Therefore, the grievance policy clearly requires that Davis requested compensation when he filed the initial grievance. See DC-ADM 804 § 1(A)(11). … A medical need qualifies as serious ... if ... it is one that has been diagnosed by a physician as requiring treatment or is so obvious that a lay person would easily recognize the necessity for a doctor's attention.”

Lower Susquehanna Riverkeeper Association v. Republic Services of Pennsylvania LLC

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 27, 2026

Clearly, a substantial percentage of Republic’s violations were egregious. See PIRG v. Powell Duffryn Terminals, Inc., 720 F. … That is too high a level of generality at which to establish a nexus.

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania Game Commission v. Thomas E. Proctor Heirs Trust

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 21, 2020

Unseated tax-sale procedures, moreover, were well established by 1908. … Even less sophisticated unseated landowners were likely aware of these well-established procedures.

Light v. Kijakazi

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 26, 2024

Bilynsky’s findings “the record does not establish any environmental limitations.” Id. … Grewels’ statement that Light “would not qualify for disability at this point.” Id. at 28.

Rodriguez v. Saul

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 9, 2022

First, when presented with a disputed factual record, it is well- established that “[t]he ALJ – not treating or examining physicians or State agency consultants – must make the ultimate disability and RFC determinations. … The burden is on the claimant to show that an impairment qualifies as severe. Bowen, 482 U.S. at 146, 107 S.Ct. 2287. Stancavage v. Saul, 469 F.Supp.3d 311, 331 (M.D. Pa. 2020).