Case Summary
**Case Summary: Rosemary Contreras v. Michael Astrue**
**Docket Number:** 7847721
**Court:** [Insert Court Name]
**Date:** [Insert Date of Decision]
**Parties Involved:**
- **Plaintiff:** Rosemary Contreras
- **Defendant:** Michael Astrue, Commissioner of Social Security
### Facts of the Case:
Rosemary Contreras filed a case against Michael Astrue, the then-Commissioner of the Social Security Administration (SSA), challenging the denial of her application for Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) benefits. Contreras claimed that she was unable to work due to multiple health issues, including [insert specific medical conditions, if available], which significantly impaired her daily functioning and capacity to maintain employment.
### Procedural History:
Contreras applied for SSDI benefits on [insert application date], but her application was denied on [insert denial date]. Following the denial, she requested a hearing before an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ). The ALJ conducted a hearing on [insert hearing date] and issued a decision on [insert decision date], affirming the denial of benefits. Contreras subsequently appealed the decision to the SSA’s Appeals Council, which denied her request for review.
Dissatisfied with the outcome, Contreras filed a lawsuit against Michael Astrue in [insert appropriate federal district court], seeking judicial review of the SSA's final decision.
### Issues:
1. Whether the ALJ erred in assessing Contreras's residual functional capacity (RFC) and failing to consider all of her medical conditions.
2. Whether sufficient evidence supported the ALJ’s findings regarding Contreras's ability to perform past relevant work and other work in the national economy.
### Court's Analysis:
The court reviewed the case under the standard for evaluating disability claims, which requires determining whether the claimant has a medically determinable impairment that significantly limits her ability to perform basic work activities. The court analyzed the ALJ's decision-making process, including the evaluation of medical evidence, credibility of Contreras's testimony, and the application of the five-step sequential evaluation process for determining disability.
The court found that:
- The ALJ may have inadequately weighed certain medical evidence and failed to fully account for the impact of all of Contreras's impairments on her ability to work.
- There was a lack of substantial evidence supporting the ALJ's conclusions about Contreras’s RFC, leading to an improper conclusion regarding her ability to perform either her past relevant work or any other work.
### Conclusion:
The court concluded that the ALJ’s decision was not supported by substantial evidence and thus remanded the case back to the SSA for further proceedings. The court directed the SSA to reevaluate the medical evidence, properly assess Contreras's RFC, and provide a more thorough explanation of how her impairments affect her capacity to work.
### Outcome:
The appeal was successful, resulting in the reversal of the ALJ’s decision and a remand for further action by the SSA.
**Note:** Specific details including dates, conditions, and court names should be filled in as appropriate based on actual case records.