Case Summary
**Case Summary: Terry Keene v. Nancy Berryhill (Docket No. 6342505)**
**Court:** United States District Court
**Jurisdiction:** District of Western Pennsylvania
**Date Filed:** [Insert Filing Date]
**Date Decided:** [Insert Decision Date]
**Parties:**
- **Plaintiff:** Terry Keene
- **Defendant:** Nancy Berryhill, Acting Commissioner of Social Security
**Background:**
Terry Keene filed a lawsuit against Nancy Berryhill, the Acting Commissioner of Social Security, challenging the denial of his application for Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) benefits. Keene claimed that he suffered from multiple medical conditions that rendered him unable to perform significant gainful activity.
**Facts:**
1. Terry Keene submitted an application for SSDI benefits, asserting that he was disabled due to [specific medical conditions, e.g., chronic pain, mental health issues, etc.].
2. The Social Security Administration (SSA) evaluated his claim, including medical records, opinions from treating physicians, and a consultative examination.
3. The SSA ultimately denied the application, concluding that Keene could perform a range of light work despite his limitations.
**Legal Issues:**
- The primary legal issue was whether the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) properly evaluated Keene's disability claim and whether the decision was supported by substantial evidence.
- Keene contended that the ALJ failed to consider the entirety of his medical history and the severity of his impairments.
**Ruling:**
The court reviewed the findings of the ALJ and the applicable standards for evaluating disability claims under the Social Security Act. The court found that:
1. The ALJ's decision was supported by substantial evidence, including credible medical evaluations and vocational expert testimony.
2. The ALJ properly weighed the evidence and did not err in the assessment of Keene's residual functional capacity (RFC).
**Outcome:**
The court upheld the decision of the ALJ and affirmed the denial of SSDI benefits to Terry Keene.
**Significance:**
This case underscores the rigorous standards of proof required for a successful SSDI claim. It highlights the importance of presenting comprehensive medical records and expert testimony to support claims of disability.
**Note:** For specific dates of filing and decision, as well as detailed legal statutes referenced, please refer to court documents or legal databases for accuracy.