Case Name in Social Security Case - Unavailable

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
Leann L. Baldock
v. 	Case No. 21-cv-972-SM
Kilolo Kijakazi, Acting
Commissioner of Social Security
Report and Recommendation
Leann L. Baldock, who is proceeding pro se, seeks judicial
review pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) of the decision of the
Social Security Administration to deny her claim for disability
insurance benefits under Title II of the Social Security Act.
In support, Baldock contends that that the Administrative Law
Judge (“ALJ”) erred in finding that she is not disabled based on
her physical and mental health conditions. 	The Acting
Commissioner moves to affirm the decision.
Standard of Review
For purposes of review under §§ 405(g), the court “is
limited to determining whether the ALJ deployed the proper legal
standards and found facts upon the proper quantum of evidence.”
Nguyen v. Chater, 172 F.3d 31, 35 (1st Cir. 1999); accord
Sacilowski v. Saul, 959 F.3d 431, 437 (1st Cir. 2020). 	The
court defers to the ALJ’s factual findings if they are supported
by substantial evidence. 	Biestek v. Berryhill, 139 S. Ct. 1148,
1153 (2019). 	Substantial evidence is “more than a mere
scintilla” and means “such relevant evidence as a reasonable
Case 1:21-cv-00972-SM Document 11 Filed 03/25/22 Page 1 of 9

2
mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion.” 	Id. at
1154. 	The court must affirm the ALJ’s findings, even if the
record could support a different conclusion, when “a reasonable
mind, reviewing the evidence in the record as a whole, could
accept it as adequate to support [the ALJ’s] conclusion.”
Irlanda Ortiz v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 955 F.2d 765,
769 (1st Cir. 1991); accord Purdy v. Berryhill, 887 F.3d 7, 13
(1st Cir. 2018).
In making a disability determination, an ALJ follows a
five-step process, asking “questions that are sequential and
iterative, such that the answer at each step determines whether
progression to the next is warranted.” 	Sacilowski, 959 F.3d at
433. 	The steps are as follows: (Step 1) whether the claimant is
currently engaging in substantial gainful activity; if not,
(Step 2) whether the claimant has a severe impairment; if so,
(Step 3) whether the impairment meets or medically equals an
entry in the Listing of Impairments; if not, (Step 4) whether
the claimant’s residual functional capacity is sufficient to
allow her to perform any of her past relevant work; and if not,
(Step 5) whether, in light of the claimant’s RFC, age,
education, and work experience, she can make an adjustment to
other work available in the national economy. 	Id. (citing 20
C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(i)-(v). 	The claimant bears the burden
of showing she is disabled through the first four steps, but at
Case 1:21-cv-00972-SM Document 11 Filed 03/25/22 Page 2 of 9

3
Step 5 the Commissioner must provide evidence to show that there
are jobs in the national economy that the claimant can do. 	Id.
at 434.
Background
Baldock applied for social security benefits in September
of 2019 when she was forty-two years old. 	Baldock had a history
of anxiety and depression that was treated by her primary care
physician. 	Baldock also had been diagnosed with congenital
heart disease and anemia.
As part of the application process, Baldock was examined by
a state agency consultant, Philip Robbins, Ph.D., in January of
2020. 	Based on his examination, Dr. Robbins reported good
results in the areas of communications, concentration, and
psychiatric functioning. 	He diagnosed persistent depressive
disorder under good control and panic disorder under good
control. 	He found Baldock capable of managing her own finances
and assessed a good prognosis.
Baldock described her activities of daily living in her
statement submitted in support of her application, which is
dated October 22, 2019. 	She reported that she had frequent
fainting episodes and shortness of breath. 	She stated that she
helped her daughter get ready for school, went to the food
pantry with a friend, sometimes fed her cat and dumped the kitty
litter, did her own personal care although it took longer, made
Case 1:21-cv-00972-SM Document 11 Filed 03/25/22 Page 3 of 9

4
meals for her daughter, did cleaning and laundry with some help,
and went outside daily to go shopping or to sit on her steps.
She was able to drive a car and ride in a car. 	She paid her
bills and handled her accounts.
In the course of the administrative proceedings, state
agency consultants provided residual functional capacity
assessments. 	In January of 2020, Dr. Jonathan Jaffe found that
Baldock had the physical functional capacity to do work at the
light exertional level, limiting standing and walking to four
hours and sitting to six hours, with occasional postural
activities. 	In April of 2020, Dr. Diana Dorsey also found that
Baldock had the same physical functional capacity.
Psychologists Dr. Landerman and Dr. Schneider found that
Baldock’s psychological diagnoses caused at most only mild
limitations.
Baldock’s application for benefits was denied, and she
requested a hearing. 	A hearing was held by telephone before an
ALJ on November 12, 2020. 	Baldock was represented by counsel
and testified at the hearing. 	A vocational expert also
testified.
Baldock testified that she had fainting spells that
occurred monthly and had had an episode six weeks before the
hearing. 	She did not go to her physician after that episode.
In addition to fainting, Baldock said that she was tired all the
Case 1:21-cv-00972-SM Document 11 Filed 03/25/22 Page 4 of 9

5
time and could not do her prior work as a licensed practical
nurse. 	She said that her fatigue had gotten worse and that she
slept on the couch to avoid going upstairs to her room. 	She
testified that her twelve-year old daughter had learned to help.
She said she was not able to do cooking and cleaning, except a
little sweeping with the help of a neighbor.
The ALJ issued a decision on December 10, 2020. 	The ALJ
found at Step 2 that Baldock had severe impairments of heart
disease and anemia. 	With respect to her mental health issues,
the ALJ concluded that the record did not show that the mental
impairments would cause more than minimal limitations, and for
that reason, were not severe.
The ALJ noted that Baldock’s medical treatment notes showed
that she had experienced fatigue and fainting due to anemia that
was addressed with treatments and had improved. 	As a result,
Baldock experienced less fatigue and had no reports of fainting
in her records. 	The ALJ also noted a lack of reports by Baldock
during medical treatment of shortness of breath.
The ALJ found that Baldock had the residual functional
capacity to perform light work except that she could stand or
walk for four hours and sit for up to six hours, could not do
climbing, could occasionally do stairs and ramps, and could
occasionally do postural activities. 	Based on the vocational
expert’s testimony at the hearing, the ALJ found that Baldock
Case 1:21-cv-00972-SM Document 11 Filed 03/25/22 Page 5 of 9

6
could do her prior work as a medical secretary. 	The ALJ also
found that there were other jobs that Baldock could do. 	As a
result, the ALJ found that Baldock was not disabled. 	The
Appeals Council denied her request for review on October 21,
2021, making the ALJ’s decision the final decision in the case.
Discussion
Baldock contends that the ALJ’s decision should be reversed
because she did not adequately consider the severity of
Baldock’s medical problems and did not consider her statement
about her daily activities in support of her application for
benefits. 	She also contends that the ALJ erred in not
considering her psychological problems and emotional
difficulties. 	The Acting Commissioner moves to affirm on the
ground that substantial evidence supports the ALJ’s decision.
A. 	Functional Capacity
In essence, Baldock challenges the ALJ’s finding as to her
physical residual functional capacity. 	A claimant’s residual
functional capacity is “the most [a claimant] can still do
despite [his] limitations.” 	§ 404.1545(a)(1). 	That
determination is made based on all of the evidence in the case
record, including medical and other evidence. 	Id.
The ALJ reviewed Baldock’s medical records that showed the
diagnoses of heart problems and anemia and the treatment she has
Case 1:21-cv-00972-SM Document 11 Filed 03/25/22 Page 6 of 9

7
received. 	The ALJ noted that the fainting and fatigue Baldock
experienced were determined by medical providers to be related
to her anemia. 	She then had treatment for anemia which had
improved that condition to a normal blood count by March of
2020. 	Baldock reported improvement in her symptoms to her
medical providers. 	Contrary to her hearing testimony, the ALJ
noted that there was no medical evidence that she continued to
have fainting episodes or fatigue at the level she described.
The ALJ found that the discrepancy between Baldock’s hearing
testimony and the medical record decreased the persuasiveness of
Baldock’s testimony.
Although Baldock faults the ALJ for not considering her
report of daily activities in her statement with her
application, she is mistaken. 	The ALJ did consider her
statement and noted that the activities she reported in the
statement were fairly extensive in contrast to the limited
activities she described in her hearing testimony. 	The ALJ
again found that the inconsistencies between the initial report
and the hearing testimony made her testimony less persuasive.
The ALJ relied in part on the residual functional capacity
opinions provided by Dr. Jaffe and Dr. Dorsey. 	The ALJ found
that those opinions were consistent with the medical record and
were well supported by the evidence they cited. 	The ALJ noted
that Dr. Jaffe and Dr. Dorsey did not review later medical
Case 1:21-cv-00972-SM Document 11 Filed 03/25/22 Page 7 of 9

8
evidence but found that the additional medical evidence did not
show any significant worsening of Baldock’s impairments.
The ALJ’s residual functional capacity assessment is
supported by substantial evidence.
B. 	Psychological Impairments
Baldock also contends that the ALJ’s decision should be
reversed because the ALJ failed to find a severe impairment due
to her psychological problems and emotional difficulties. 	When
the ALJ continues past Step 2, a finding that an impairment is
non-severe at Step 2 is harmless unless the claimant can show
with medical evidence that the impairment would change her
residual functional capacity in her favor. 	Joshua S. v.
Kijakazi, 20-cv-427-JDL, 2021 WL 5036015, at *3 (D. Me. Oct. 27,
2021); McCusker v. Saul, 19-cv-853-PB, 2020 DNH 196, 2020 WL
6580598, at *6 (D.N.H. Nov. 10, 2020).
Baldock points to no evidence in the record to support her
argument. 	In contrast, Dr. Robbin’s report, based on his
consultative examination, demonstrates that Baldock had no
severe mental impairments. 	Dr. Landerman and Dr. Schneider also
found no severe mental impairments. 	Therefore, substantial
evidence supports the ALJ’s finding that Baldock did not have
severe limitations at Step 2 of the analysis.
Case 1:21-cv-00972-SM Document 11 Filed 03/25/22 Page 8 of 9

9
Conclusion
For the foregoing reasons, the district court judge should
deny Baldock’s motion to reverse (document no. 8) and grant the
Acting Commissioner’s motion to affirm (document no. 10).
Any objections to this Report and Recommendation must be
filed within fourteen days of receipt of this notice. 	See Fed.
R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2). 	The fourteen-day period may be extended
upon motion. 	Only those issues raised in the objection(s) to
this Report and Recommendation are subject to review in the
district court. 	See Sch. Union No. 37 v. United Natl Ins. Co.,
617 F.3d 554, 564 (1st Cir. 2010). 	Any issues not preserved by
such objection(s) are precluded on appeal. 	See id. 	Failure to
file any objections within the specified time waives the right
to appeal the district court's order. 	See Santos-Santos v.
Torres-Centeno, 842 F.3d 163, 168 (1st Cir. 2016).
______________________________
Andrea K. Johnstone
United States Magistrate Judge
March 25, 2022
cc: 	Leann L. Baldock, pro se
Hugh Dun Rappaport, SAUSA
Case 1:21-cv-00972-SM Document 11 Filed 03/25/22 Page 9 of 9