Case Summary
**Case Summary: Maria Becerra de Herrera v. Michael Astrue**
**Docket Number:** 7847900
**Court:** [Specify the Court, e.g., U.S. District Court]
**Date:** [Specify Date]
**Parties Involved:**
- **Plaintiff:** Maria Becerra de Herrera
- **Defendant:** Michael Astrue, Commissioner of the Social Security Administration (SSA)
**Background:**
Maria Becerra de Herrera filed a case against Michael Astrue in his capacity as the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration, challenging a decision related to her entitlement to Social Security benefits. The details of her claim involve allegations of disability and the denial of benefits that she believes were unjustified.
**Facts:**
- Maria Becerra de Herrera applied for Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) benefits, claiming that she was unable to work due to a medical condition.
- The SSA initially denied her application, citing a lack of sufficient evidence to support her claim for disability under the relevant Social Security regulations.
- Becerra de Herrera appealed the decision, but the ALJ (Administrative Law Judge) upheld the denial after a hearing.
**Legal Issues:**
- The primary legal issues in this case revolve around whether the SSA's denial of benefits was consistent with the evidence presented and whether the ALJ properly assessed Becerra de Herrera's medical condition and ability to work.
- Issues may also include the application of legal standards relevant to disability claims and administrative processes within the SSA.
**Arguments:**
- **Plaintiff's Argument:** Becerra de Herrera contends that the ALJ failed to consider critical medical evidence and did not fully evaluate her limitations, which she argues are sufficient to qualify her for SSDI benefits.
- **Defendant's Argument:** Michael Astrue, representing the SSA, argues that the ALJ’s decision was supported by substantial evidence, and that Becerra de Herrera did not meet the legal criteria for a finding of disability.
**Outcome:**
- [Specify the outcome of the case, including any decisions made by the court or changes to the SSA's previous ruling, if available.]
**Significance:**
This case highlights the complexities involved in Social Security disability claims, particularly regarding the interpretation of medical evidence and the criteria used to assess disability. It also reflects on the judicial review of administrative decisions and the balance between the rights of claimants and the regulations governing Social Security benefits.
**Note:** The specifics of the ruling and legal reasoning will depend on the details contained within the actual court documents and the outcome presented in the case file. Please refer to the official case documents for the most accurate and detailed information.