(SS) Arambula Vega v. Commissioner of Social Security

Opinion

ALMA ARAMBULA VEGA, Case No. 1:24-cv-0360 JLT GSA Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING THE FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S APPEAL, DENYING DEFENDANT’S REQUEST TO AFFIRM, AND v. REMANDING THE ACTION FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS PURSUANT TO SENTENCE FRANK BISIGNANO, FOUR OF 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) Commissioner of Social Security1, ORDER DIRECTING ENTRY OF JUDGMENT Defendant. IN FAVOR OF PLAINTIFF ALMA ARAMBULA VEGA AND AGAINST DEFENDANT FRANK BISIGNANO, COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY (Docs. 17, 20, and 22) Alma Arambula Vega initiated this action seeking judicial review of a final decision denying her application for a period of disability and disability insurance under Title II of the Social Security Act. (See Docs. 1, 17.) Plaintiff asserts the administrative law judge erred in evaluating the medical evidence to determine her mental residual functional capacity and “new and material” evidence submitted to the Appeals Council showed the RFC was not supported by substantial evidence. (Doc. 17 at 2, 4-16.) The Commissioner asserts substantial evidence supports the ALJ’s decision, and the Court should affirm. (Doc. 20 at 4-13.) 1 Frank Bisignano became the Commissioner of Social Security on May 6, 2025. Pursuant to Rule 25(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Court substitutes Frank Bisignano as the defendant in this action. The magistrate judge determined that “the ALJ’s analysis in support of the mental RFC and the rejection of Dr. Cruz’s opinion is unpersuasive and unsupported by substantial evidence.” (Doc. 22 at 8; see id. at 4-8.) The magistrate judge also found evidence submitted to the Appeals Council “bears directly and substantially on the matter in dispute, relates to the period on or before the date of the hearing decision, and there is a reasonable possibility/probability that the new evidence would have changed the outcome.” (Id. at 14 [cleaned up]; see also id. at 9-13.) The magistrate judge recommended the Court remand the matter for further proceedings. (Id.) In addition, the magistrate judge indicated that upon remand, all records rejected by the Appeals Council should be addressed by the ALJ, with the following exceptions: (1) records from Dr. Singh concerning Plaintiff’s back impairment (dated June 24, 2022, to January 11, 2023); (2) records from Pro-PT (dated September 27, 2022 to November 21, 2022), addressing the back impairment; (3) records from Valley Metabolic Imaging (dated January 14, 2021 to June 17, 2021); and (4) medical records from the Neuro- Pain Medical Center dated December 28, 2020 through April 12, 2022. (Id. at 14.) The Court served the Findings and Recommendations on the parties and notified them that any objections were due within 14 days. (Doc. 22 at 15.) The Court advised the parties that “the failure to file objections within the specified time may result in the waiver of rights on appeal.” (Id., quoting Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 839 (9th Cir. 2014)). Neither party filed objections, and the time to do so has passed. According to 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1), this Court performed a de novo review of the case. Having carefully reviewed the entire matter, the Court concludes the Findings and Recommendations are supported by the record and proper analysis. Thus, the Court ORDERS: 1. The Findings and Recommendations dated June 23, 2025 (Doc. 22) are ADOPTED in full. 2. Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment and appeal from the administrative decision of the Commissioner of Social Security (Doc. 17) is GRANTED. 3. The Commissioner’s request to affirm (Doc. 20) is DENIED. 4. The agency’s determination to deny benefits is REVERSED. 5. The matter is REMANDED pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for further proceedings, consistent with this order. 6. The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment in favor of Alma Arambula Vega and against Defendant Frank Bisignano, Commissioner of Social Security, and to close this case. Dated: _ July 9, 2025 Cerin | Tower TED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE