Raymond BACA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Defendant-Appellee

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that medical records that post-date the relevant time frame may be considered if they relate back to the relevant time frame
• noting that findings by other agencies “are entitled to weight and must be considered” (internal quotation marks omitted)
• reasoning that evidence that bears upon a plaintiff’s condition after his date last insured is “pertinent evidence” that may “disclose the severity and continuity of impairments existing before the earning requirement date”
• reasoning that evidence that bears upon a plaintiff’s condition after his date last insured is “pertinent evidence” that may “disclose the severity and continuity of impairments existing before the earning requirement date”
• reasoning that evidence that bears upon a plaintiff’s condition after his date last insured is “pertinent evidence” that may “disclose the severity and continuity of impairments existing before the earning requirement date”
• findings by other agencies are entitled to weight and must be considered, but are not binding on the Commissioner

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).