ERIN L. WIEDEMANN, Magistrate Judge.
Plaintiff, Joseph Tabone, brings this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), seeking judicial review of a decision of the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration (Commissioner) denying his claims for a period of disability and disability insurance benefits (DIB) and supplemental security income (SSI) benefits under the provisions of Titles II and XVI of the Social Security Act (Act). In this judicial review, the Court must determine whether there is substantial evidence in the administrative record to support the Commissioner's decision.
Plaintiff protectively filed his current applications for DIB and SSI on August 24, 2015, alleging an inability to work since January 1, 2015, due to anxiety, severe depression, and back problems. (Tr. 61, 192, 199). An administrative hearing was held on June 14, 2016, at which Plaintiff appeared with counsel and testified. (Tr. 35-58).
By written decision dated August 16, 2016, the ALJ found that during the relevant time period, Plaintiff had an impairment or combination of impairments that were severe. (Tr. 19). Specifically, the ALJ found Plaintiff had the following severe impairments: morbid obesity; a spine disorder; a generalized anxiety disorder; and a persistent depressive disorder, pure dysthymic disorder. However, after reviewing all of the evidence presented, the ALJ determined that Plaintiff's impairments did not meet or equal the level of severity of any impairment listed in the Listing of Impairments found in Appendix I, Subpart P, Regulation No. 4. (Tr. 19). The ALJ found Plaintiff retained the residual functional capacity (RFC) to:
(Tr. 21). With the help of a vocational expert, the ALJ determined Plaintiff could perform work as a marking clerk, and a routing clerk. (Tr. 28).
Plaintiff then requested a review of the hearing decision by the Appeals Council, which after reviewing additional evidence submitted by Plaintiff, denied that request on July 12, 2017. (Tr. 1-7). Subsequently, Plaintiff filed this action. (Doc. 1). This case is before the undersigned pursuant to the consent of the parties. (Doc. 7). Both parties have filed appeal briefs, and the case is now ready for decision. (Doc. 11, 12).
This Court's role is to determine whether the Commissioner's findings are supported by substantial evidence on the record as a whole.
The Court has reviewed the entire transcript and the parties' briefs. For the reasons stated in the ALJ's well-reasoned opinion and the Government's brief, the Court finds Plaintiff's arguments on appeal to be without merit and finds that the record as a whole reflects substantial evidence to support the ALJ's decision. Accordingly, the ALJ's decision is hereby summarily affirmed and Plaintiff's Complaint is dismissed with prejudice.