Case Summary
**Case Summary: Michael Stark v. Michael Astrue**
**Docket Number:** 7839957
**Court:** United States District Court
**Date Filed:** [Insert Date]
**Parties Involved:**
- **Plaintiff:** Michael Stark
- **Defendant:** Michael Astrue, Commissioner of Social Security
**Background:**
Michael Stark filed a case against Michael Astrue, who was the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration at the time of the filing. Stark's case centers around issues related to Social Security benefits, which he claims were wrongfully denied or not adequately assessed by the defendant's agency.
**Legal Issues:**
The core legal issues in this case revolve around:
1. The denial of Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) benefits.
2. The process and standards used by the Social Security Administration in evaluating Stark’s disability claims.
3. Potential violations of Stark’s rights under the Social Security Act.
**Facts:**
- Stark applied for SSDI benefits, citing a range of physical and mental health issues that he contended severely limited his ability to work.
- The Social Security Administration initially denied his application, leading to Stark filing an appeal.
- The administrative hearings that followed resulted in a sustained denial of benefits, prompting Stark to seek judicial review.
**Arguments:**
- **Plaintiff’s Argument:** Stark argues that the denial of his claim was not based on substantial evidence and that the SSA failed to properly consider medical records and expert opinions that supported his claim for disability.
- **Defendant’s Argument:** Astrue’s defense likely revolves around the assertion that the decision made by the SSA was supported by substantial evidence and that the appropriate legal standards were followed during the review process.
**Outcome:**
[Insert the outcome of the case, whether the court ruled in favor of Stark or Astrue, and any reasoning provided by the court.]
**Significance:**
This case highlights the complexities involved in Social Security disability claims and serves as a reference for issues surrounding administrative law and the standards for judicial review of agency decisions.
**Conclusion:**
The case of Michael Stark v. Michael Astrue is an essential examination of the laborious process individuals face when contesting Social Security benefit denials and the vital role of courts in ensuring fair treatment under the law.
---
(Note: The specific details regarding the filing date, the court's decision, and the case's significance need to be filled in based on actual case outcomes and records, as the summarized case above is an example and may not reflect real information.)