United States District Court, M.D. Alabama, Southern Division
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER 
Russ Walker, United States Magistrate Judge.
Bernard Dewitt Condrey commenced this action on November 17,
2017, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), seeking judicial
review of a final adverse decision of the Commissioner
denying his application for a period of disability and
disability insurance benefits. See Doc. 1; Doc. 13.
On August 22, 2014, plaintiff filed his application alleging
disability as of January 18, 2014, because of
“seizures, ” “crooked spine, ”
“torn ligament left shoulder-had surgery, ”
“bursitis in left shoulder, ” “carpal
tunnel in both wrists, ” and “migraines.”
See R. 187, 191. On September 28, 2016,
Administrative Law Judge Robert Waller (“the
ALJ”) issued an adverse decision after holding a
hearing on May 23, 2016, on the plaintiff's
application. See R. 18-28, 33-68. The Appeals
Council denied plaintiff's request for review on
September 13, 2017, and the ALJ's decision became the
final decision of the Commissioner. See R. at 1-5.
instant appeal, the plaintiff asks the court to reverse the
Commissioner's adverse decision and award benefits or, in
the alternative, to remand this cause to the Commissioner
under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). See
Doc. 13 at 6. This case is ready for review pursuant to 42
U.S.C. § 405(g). The parties have consented to entry of
final judgment by the Magistrate Judge. See 28
U.S.C. § 636(c); see also Docs. 11, 12. For the
reasons stated herein, and based upon its review of the
record, the court finds that the Commissioner's decision
is due to be affirmed.
addition, the plaintiff moves for an award of reasonable
attorney's fees pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice
Act (“EAJA”), 28 U.S.C. § 241(d).
See Doc. 13 at 6. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 54(d)(2)(B), the plaintiff also requests an
extension of time to file a motion for attorney's fees
under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b). See id. These motions
will be denied.
court's review of the Commissioner's decision is
narrowly circumscribed. The function of this court is to
determine whether the decision of the Commissioner is
supported by substantial evidence and whether proper legal
standards were applied. Richardson v. Perales, 402
U.S. 389, 390 (1971); Wilson v. Barnhart, 284 F.3d
1219, 1221 (11th Cir. 2002). This court must
“scrutinize the record as a whole to determine if the
decision reached is reasonable and supported by substantial
evidence.” Bloodsworth v. Heckler, 703 F.2d
1233, 1239 (11th Cir. 1983). Substantial evidence is
“such relevant evidence as a reasonable person would
accept as adequate to support a conclusion.”
Id. It is “more than a scintilla, but less
than a preponderance.” Id. A reviewing court
“may not decide facts anew, reweigh the evidence, or
substitute [its] decision for that of the
[Commissioner].” Dyer v. Barnhart, 395 F.3d
1206, 1210 (11th Cir. 2005). In other words, this court is
prohibited from reviewing the Commissioner's findings of
fact de novo, even where a preponderance of the
evidence supports alternative conclusions.
the court must uphold factual findings that are supported by
substantial evidence, it reviews the ALJ's legal
conclusions de novo because no presumption of
validity attaches to the ALJ's determination of the
proper legal standards to be applied. Davis v.
Shalala, 985 F.2d 528, 531 (11th Cir. 1993). If the
court finds an error in the ALJ's application of the law,
or if the ALJ fails to provide the court with sufficient
reasoning for determining that the proper legal analysis has
been conducted, it must reverse the ALJ's decision.
Cornelius v. Sullivan, 936 F.2d 1143, 1145-46 (11th
establish his or her entitlement for a period of disability,
a claimant must be disabled as defined by the Social Security
Act and the Regulations promulgated thereunder. The
Regulations define “disabled” as “the
inability to do any substantial gainful activity by reason of
any medically determinable physical or mental impairment
which can be expected to result in death or which has lasted
or can be expected to last for a continuous period of not
less than twelve (12) months.” 20 C.F.R. §
404.1505(a). To establish an entitlement to disability
benefits, a claimant must provide evidence about a
“physical or mental impairment” that “must
result from anatomical, physiological, or psychological
abnormalities which can be shown by medically acceptable
clinical and laboratory diagnostic techniques.” 20
C.F.R. § 404.1508.
Regulations provide a five-step process for determining
whether a claimant is disabled. 20 C.F.R. §
404.1520(a)(4)(i-v). The Commissioner must determine in
(1) whether the claimant is currently employed;
(2) whether the claimant has a severe impairment;
(3) whether the claimant's impairment meets or equals an
impairment listed by the Commissioner;
(4) whether the claimant can perform his or her past work;
(5) whether the claimant is capable of performing any work in
the national economy.
Pope v. Shalala, 998 F.2d 473, 477 (7th Cir. 1993)
(citing to a formerly applicable C.F.R. section),
overruled on other grounds by Johnson v. Apfel, 189
F.3d 561, 562-63 (7th Cir.1999); accord McDaniel v.
Bowen, 800 F.2d 1026, 1030 (11th Cir. ...