Ingram v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that, under sentence six, a district court cannot remand for evaluation of evidence that was previously submitted to Appeals Council
• holding that district court must affirm if ALJ’s decision is supported by substantial evidence, even if the evidence preponderates against it
• recognizing that we have previously “mistakenly stated that evidence first presented to the Appeals Council could be considered by the court only if the applicant had good cause for not presenting it earlier to the administrative law judge.”
• holding that the VE’s response to the ALJ’s hypothetical question that the claimant could perform other work constituted substantial evidence to supporting the denial of benefits where the ALJ’s determined the claimant could perform sedentary work.
• holding that the ALJ did not err by failing to include alleged impairments in a hypothetical question posed to the VE where the alleged impairments “were either not supported by [the claimant’s] medical records or were alleviated by medication.”
• noting that “a reviewing court is limited to the certified administrative record in examining the evidence” (citation and quotation marks omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).