Case law

Kanski v. Kijakazi

District Court, E.D. Washington · Aug 15, 2023

However, further 9 proceedings are necessary because disability is not clearly established based on 10 Plaintiff’s physical impairments.96 Because the ALJ’s weighing of Plaintiff’s 11 testimony and the medical evidence … it undermines the medical opinion in 10 question.101 If necessary, the ALJ shall further develop the record and call a 11 medical expert regarding Plaintiff’s physical impairments—particularly an expert 12 qualified

Robles v. Kijakazi

District Court, E.D. Washington · Aug 10, 2022

The party appealing the ALJ’s decision 11 generally bears the burden of establishing that it was harmed. Shinseki v. … Shalala, 53 F.3d 1035, 1041 (9th Cir. 1995). 8 “Only physicians and certain other qualified specialists are considered 9 ‘[a]cceptable medical sources.’”

Wolf v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, E.D. Washington · Nov 10, 2020

Medical Opinions: Plaintiff establishes consequential error. 5 Plaintiff challenges the ALJ’s assignment of little weight to Dr … for a longitudinal perspective and the examiner is to either append the reviewed 11 records to the report or clearly

Darling v. Kijakazi

District Court, E.D. Washington · Jun 8, 2022

Recently, the Ninth Circuit held that the Social Security regulations 13 revised in March 2017 are “clearly irreconcilable with [past Ninth Circuit] caselaw 14 according special deference to the opinions of treating … The Commissioner further asserts that the ALJ may consider “any 8 work activity,” including work that does not qualify as substantial gainful activity,” 9 in assessing the consistency of a doctor’s opinion with other

France v. Saul

District Court, E.D. Washington · May 15, 2020

The party appealing the ALJ’s 5 decision generally bears the burden of establishing that it was harmed. … Astrue, 4 700 F.3d 386, 389 (9th Cir. 2012). 5 “A finding of ‘disabled’ under the five-step inquiry does not automatically 6 qualify a claimant for disability benefits.”

Magallan v. Saul

District Court, E.D. Washington · Nov 8, 2019

If the impairment meets or equals one of the listed impairments, 5 the claimant is per se disabled and qualifies for benefits. Id. … must address how the substance 13 abuse disorder pertains to the intensity and persistence of his alleged symptoms. 14 In this case, the ALJ stated that Plaintiff had a substance addition disorder, 15 did not clearly

Swenson v. Kijakazi

District Court, E.D. Washington · Jan 27, 2022

(quotation and citation omitted). 12 The party appealing the ALJ’s decision generally bears the burden of establishing 13 that it was harmed. Shinseki v. … Lewis qualified as 9 a medical consultant under the Regulations is harmless so long as the ALJ’s RFC 10 determination is supported by substantial evidence. The Court finds that it is.

Collins v. Saul

District Court, E.D. Washington · Mar 24, 2020

The party appealing the ALJ’s 10 decision generally bears the burden of establishing that it was harmed. … However, Plaintiff’s other stressors from the disability 3 benefits process, homelessness and other unstable living environments, and issues 4 with his family and stepchildren are less clearly separable from Plaintiff’

P B v. Thorp School District

District Court, E.D. Washington · Mar 29, 2021

violation of the IDEA where middle 6 school did not implement the exact same behavioral management plan as student’s 7 elementary school). 8 Although P.B. may have qualified … Clearly, the relationship 25 between Ms. Green and P.B. were far from perfect. However, Plaintiffs have not 26 demonstrated that the ALJ erred.

Ruiz v. Kijakazi

District Court, E.D. Washington · Mar 14, 2022

Here, the ALJ discounted Plaintiff’s reported symptoms because his 4 “limitations are clearly … first basis, the only individuals Plaintiff sought treatment from 2 were his counselors, and there is no indication that the counselors were qualified

Daughrity v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, E.D. Washington · Mar 30, 2020

The party appealing the ALJ’s 10 decision generally bears the burden of establishing that it was harmed. … “Thus, applying our normal standard of review 6 to the requirements of step two, [the Court] must determine whether the ALJ had 7 substantial evidence to find that the medical evidence clearly established that 8 [Plaintiff

Shaman v. Saul

District Court, E.D. Washington · Jan 21, 2020

The party appealing the ALJ’s 12 decision generally bears the burden of establishing that it was harmed. … established that [Plaintiff] did not have a medically severe 3 impairment or combination of impairments.”

Gonzalez v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, E.D. Washington · Sep 13, 2019

This burden is met once the 2 claimant establishes that physical or mental impairments prevent him from 3 engaging in his previous occupations. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a). … Lace because they 14 were qualified to render opinions as to the nature and severity of Plaintiff’s 15 conditions and were the only medical sources to review the entire record.

United Energy Workers Healthcare Corporation v. ACT Now DME LLC

District Court, E.D. Washington · Oct 8, 2020

ECF No. 37 at 4–6. 5 Under both the DTSA and WUTSA, information qualifies as a trade secret if 6 (a) the owner has taken reasonable measures to keep it secret; and (b) … Contrary to the Individual Defendants’ 4 interpretation, the plain language of RCW 49.62.100 indicates that the Chapter’s 5 application is clearly prospective. 6 RCW 49.62.080

Rumburg v. Kijakazi

District Court, E.D. Washington · Sep 20, 2021

The party appealing the ALJ’s 10 decision generally bears the burden of establishing that it was harmed. … Shalala, 53 F.3d 1035, 1041 (9th Cir. 1995). 10 “Only physicians and certain other qualified specialists are considered 11 ‘[a]cceptable medical sources.’”

Grondal v. United States of America

District Court, E.D. Washington · Jul 9, 2020

Neither the statute itself nor the IRA provides a definition 8 of the term “Indian land.” 8 However, the Government clearly considered the Moses 9 Allotments to be “Indian land” in 1935. … The Scheduling Order at ECF No. 272 established deadlines for 7 discovery related to the Government’s Motion for Summary Judgment re Ejectment 8 only.