Cheatham v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration
Court Docket Sheet

District of Arizona

4:2017-cv-00244 (azd)

COMPLAINT filed by Tami Lee Cheatham.

Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 1 Filed 05/26/17 Page 1 of 2 1 Howard D. Olinsky 2 Olinsky Law Group 300 South State Street, Suite 420 3 Syracuse, NY 13202 4 N.Y. Bar No. 2044865 Telephone: (315) 701-5780 5 Facsimile: (315) 701-5781 6 holinsky@windisability.com 7 Attorney for Plaintiff Tami Lee Cheatham 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 10 TUCSON DIVISION 11) NO. TAMI LEE CHEATHAM,) 12 Soc.Sec. #XXX-XX-3768, Plaintiff,) 13 v.) 14) COMPLAINT NANCY A. BERRYHILL, acting) 15 Commissioner of Social Security,) 16 Defendant.) __________________________________) 17 18 Plaintiff, Tami Lee Cheatham, by her attorney, Howard D. Olinsky, alleges as 19 follows: 20 1. The jurisdiction of this Court is invoked pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) to 21 22 review a decision of the Commissioner of Social Security denying Plaintiff’s application 23 for Social Security Disability Insurance benefits for lack of disability. 24 2. This action is an appeal from a final administrative decision denying 25 26 Plaintiff’s claim. 27 3. This action is commenced within the appropriate time period set forth in the 28 attached Appeals Council Notice dated March 24, 2017. (Exhibit A). Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 1 Filed 05/26/17 Page 2 of 2 1 4. Plaintiff, whose social security number is XXX-XX-3768, resides in 2 Tucson, Pima County, Arizona, which is within this judicial district and division. 3 4 5. The Defendant, Nancy A. Berryhill, is the acting Commissioner of Social 5 Security of the United States of America. 6 6. Plaintiff is disabled. 7 8 7. The agency committed error of law by denying Appeals Council review of 9 the decision by the Administrative Law Judge, or otherwise to deny relief that was within 10 the authority of the Appeals Council. 11 8. The conclusions and findings of fact of the Defendant are not supported by 12 13 substantial evidence and are contrary to law and regulation. 14 WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays that this Court: 15 1. Find that the Plaintiff is entitled to Social Security Disability Insurance 16 17 benefits under the provisions of the Social Security Act; or 18 2. Remand the case for a further hearing; 19 3. Award attorney’s fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 20 21 2412, on the grounds that the Commissioner’s action in this case was not substantially 22 justified; and 23 4. Order such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper. 24 25 Dated this 26th day of May 2017. 26 BY: s/Howard D. Olinsky 27 Howard D. Olinsky, Esq. Attorney for Plaintiff 28 (Pending Admission Pro Hac Vice)

Civil Cover Sheet

http://www.azd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/generate_civil_js44.pl Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 1-1 Filed 05/26/17 Page 1 of 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF ARIZONA This automated JS-44 conforms generally to the manual JS-44 approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974. The data is required for the use of the Clerk of Court for the purpose of initiating the civil docket sheet. The information contained herein neither replaces nor supplements the filing and service of pleadings or other papers as required by law. This form is authorized for use only in the District of Arizona. The completed cover sheet must be printed directly to PDF and filed as an attachment to the Complaint or Notice of Removal. Plaintiff(s): Tami Lee Cheatham Defendant(s): Nancy A. Berryhill County of Residence: Pima County of Residence: Pima County Where Claim For Relief Arose: Pima Plaintiff's Atty(s): Defendant's Atty(s): Howard D. Olinsky, Esq. Olinsky Law Group 300 S. State Street Syracuse, New York 13202 3157015780 II. Basis of Jurisdiction: 2. U.S. Government Defendant III. Citizenship of Principal Parties (Diversity Cases Only) Plaintiff:-N/A Defendant:-N/A IV. Origin: 1. Original Proceeding V. Nature of Suit: 863 DIWC/DIWW (405(g)) VI.Cause of Action: 42 USC 405(g) and 42 USC 1383(c)(3): Denial of Social Security Disability Insurance benefits and Supplemental Security Income benefits. VII. Requested in Complaint Class Action: No Dollar Demand: Jury Demand: No VIII. This case is not related to another case. Signature: s/Howard D. Olinsky Date: 5/26/2017 If any of this information is incorrect, please go back to the Civil Cover Sheet Input form using the Back button in your browser and change it. Once correct, save this form as a PDF and include it as an attachment to your case opening documents. Revised: 01/2014 1 of 1 5/26/17, 1:38 PM

Exhibit A)(DLC

EXHIBIT A Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 1-2 Filed 05/26/17 Page 2 of 6 MCfr &. SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION W Refer to:-3768 TLC Office of Disability Adjudication and Review 5107 Leesburg Pike Falis Church, VA 22041-3255 \; Telephone: (877) 670-2722 \ Date: March 24,2017 S% I t NOTICE OF APPEALS COUNCIL ACTION *3?0/. \ V Ms. Tami Lee Cheatham 2 5 This is about your request for review of the Administrative Law Judge's decision dated January 4,2016. We Have Denied Your Request for Review \ We found no reason under our rules to review the Administrative Law Judge's decision. I Therefore, we have denied your request for review. This means that the Administrative Law Judge's decision is the final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security in your case. I Rules We Applied We applied the laws, regulations and rulings in effect as of the date we took this action. Under our rules, we will review your case for any of the following reasons: I I i • The Administrative Law Judge appears to have abused his or her discretion. i • There is an error of law. 5 • The decision is not supported by substantial evidence. 5 • There is a broad policy or procedural issue that may affect the public interest. 8 i O • We receive new and material evidence and the decision is contrary to the weight of all the evidence now in the record. Suspect Social Security Fraud? Please visit http://0ig.ssa.g0v/r or call the Inspector General's Fraud Hotline at 1-800-269-0271 (TTY 1-866-501-2101). See Next Page Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 1-2 Filed 05/26/17 Page 3 of 6 Tami Lee Cheatham (-3768) Page 2 of 4 What We Considered In looking at your case, we considered the reasons you disagree with the decision in the material listed on the enclosed Order of Appeals Council. We considered whether the Administrative Law Judge's action, findings, or conclusion is contrary to the weight c f the evidence currently of record. We found that this information does not provide a basis for changing tiie Administrative Law Judge's decision. We also looked at evidence from Northwest Rheumatology dated September 9,2016, and the Center for Neurosciencos dated October 25,2016 through October 28,2016. The Administrative Law Juc ge decided your case through January 4,2016. This new information is about a later time. Tl erefore, it does not affect the decision about whether you were disabled beginning on o r before January 4,2016. If you want us to consid er whether you were disabled after January 4, 2016, you need to apply again. The new informaion you submitted is available in your electronic file for you to use in your new claim. If you need a paper copy of this evidence, you should: • Contact us at the address noted at the top of this letter; or • Contact your loc il field office at the address noted at the bottom of this letter when you file a new claim. If you file a new claim for disability insurance benefits within 6 months alter you receive this letter, we can use January 11,2016, the date of your request for review, as the date of your new claim. The date yoi i file a claim can make a difference in the amount of benefits we can pay. You have the right to file a new application at any time, but filing a new application is not the same as appealing our action. If you disagree with our action and file a new application instead of appealing, yoi might lose some benefits or not qualify for any benefits. So, if you disagree with our action, you should file an appeal within 60 days., If You Disagree With Oar Action If you disagree with our action, you may ask for court review of the Administrative Law Judge's decision by filing a civil action. If you do not ask for court review, the Administrative Law Judge's decision will be a final decision that can be changed only under special rules. How to File a Civil Action You may file a civil action (ask for court review) by filing a complaint in the United States District Court for the judicial district in which you live. The complaint should name the Commissioner of Social Security as the defendant and should include the Social Security numbers) shown at the top of this letter. See Next Page Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 1-2 Filed 05/26/17 Page 4 of 6 Tami Lee Cheatham (3768) Page 3 of4 You or your representative must deliver copies of your complaint and of the summons issued. by the court to the U.S. Attorney for the judicial district where you file your complaint, as provided in rule 4(i) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. You or your representative must also send copies of the complaint and summons, by certified or registered mail, to the Social Security Administration's Office of the General Counsel that is responsible for the processing and handling of litigation in the particular judicial district in which the complaint is filed. The names, addresses, and jurisdictional responsibilities of these offices are published in the Federal Register (70 FR 73320, December 9,2005), and are available on-line at the Social Security Administration's Internet site, http://policv.ssa.gov/ponis.nsf71inks/0203106020. You or your representative must also send copies of the complaint and summons, by certified or registered mail, to the Attorney General of the United States, Washington, DC 20530. Time To File a Civil Action • You have 60 days to file a civil action (ask for court review). • The 60 days start the day after you receive this letter. We assume you received this letter 5 days after the date on it unless you show us that you did not receive it within the 5-day period. • If you cannot file for court review within 60 days, you may ask the Appeals Council to extend your time to tile. You must have a good reason for waiting more than 60 days to ask for court review. You must make the request in writing and give your reason(s) in the request. ss You must mail your request for more time to the Appeals Council at the address shown at the top of this notice. Please put the Social Security number(s) also shown at the top of this § notice on your request. We will send you a letter telling you whether your request for more § time has been granted. About The Law § § The right to court review for claims under Title II (Social Security) is provided for in Section 205(g) of the Social Security Act. This section is also Section 405(g) of Title 42 of the United 8 States Code. i The right to court review for claims under Title XVI (Supplemental Security Income) is provided for in Section 163 l(cX3) of the Social Security Act. This section is also Section 1383(c) of Title 42 ofthe United States Code. The rules on filing civil actions are Rules 4(c) and (i) in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. See Next Page Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 1-2 Filed 05/26/17 Page 5 of 6 Tami Lee Cheatham (-3768) Page 4 of4 If You Have Any Questioi s If you have any questions, you may call, write, or visit any Social Security office. If you do call or visit an office, please have this notice with you. The telephone number of the local office that serves your ar & is (866)331-7693. Its address is: Social Security 3808 N 1st Ave Tucson, AZ 85719-2030/s/Jonathan M. Grossman Appeals Officer Enclosure: Order of Appeal \ Council cc: Bradford D. Myler P.O. Box 127 Lehi,UT 84043-0127 Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 1-2 Filed 05/26/17 Page 6 of 6 1 Social Security Administration I OFFICE OF DISABILITY ADJUDICATION AND REVIEW •i ORDER OF APPEALS COUNCIL * I IN THE CASE OF CLAIM FOR Period of Disability G Tarai Lee Cheatham Disability Insurance Benefits (Claimant) 3768 (Wage Earner) (Social Security Number) The Appeals Council has received additional evidence which it is making part of the record. That evidence consists of the following exhibits:! Exhibit 18E Representative brief dated February 3,2016 I Date: March 24,2017 I § c e i s 8 i

APPLICATION for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis by Tami Lee Cheatham.

Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 2 Filed 05/26/17 Page 1 of 5 Page I of 5 AO 239 (Rev. 0 IllS) Application to Proceed in District Court Without Prepaying Fees or Costs (Long Fonn) UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT for the District of Arizona TAMI LEE CHEATHAM) PlaintifJ1Petitioner) v.) Civil Action No. NANCY A. BERRYHILL, ACTING COMM. OF 55) Defendant/Respondent) APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN DISTRICT COURT WITHOUT PREPAYING FEES OR COSTS (Long Form) Affidavit in Support of the Application Instructions I am a plaintiff or petitioner in this case and declare Complete all questions in this application and then sign it. that I am unable to pay the costs of these proceedings Do not leave any blanks: if the answer to a question is "0," and that I am entitled to the relief requested. I declare "none," or "not applicable (N/A)," write that response. If under penalty of perjury that the information below is you need more space to answer a question or to explain your true and understand that a false statement may result in answer, attach a separate sheet of paper identified with your a dismissal of my claims. name, your case's docket number, and the question number. Signed: Date: 05/15/2017 1. For both you and your spouse estimate the average amount of money received from each of the following sources during the past 12 months. Adjust any amount that was received weekly, biweekly, quarterly, semiannually, or annually to show the monthly rate. Use gross amounts, that is, amounts before any deductions for taxes or otherwise. Income source Average monthly income Income amount expected amount during the past 12 next month months You Spouse You Spouse Employment $ 0 $-a-$ 0 $ ",. C~ Self-employment $ (1 $ 2.Jsoo $ 0 $ ~Ece, Income from real property (such as rental income) $ () $ D $ 0 $ 0 Interest and dividends $ () $ () $ D-$ D Gifts $ 0 $ 0 $ () $ f) Alimony 0 0 0 $ $ ($ 0 $ Child support $ () $ LJ $ U $ V"'" Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 2 Filed 05/26/17 Page 2 of 5 Page 2 of 5 AD 239 (Rev. 01/15) Application to Proceed in District Court Without Prepaying Fees or Costs (Long Form) Retirement (such as social security, pensions, annuities, insurance) $ () $ u $U $ () Disability (such as social security. insurance payments) $ 0 $ 0 $U 1'"\ $0 Unemployment payments $ D $ 0 $ U $ f) r.:'\ Public-assistance (such as welfare) d V f) $ 0 $ $ $:-.. Other (specify): $ U $ i> $ 0 $ U, ~606 2,0 0 0 $ 0.00 $ r 0.00 $ Total monthly income: '$ 2. List your employment history for the past two years, most recent employer first. (Gross monthly pay is before taxes or other deductions.) Employer Address Dates of employment Gross A, monthly Day N fA N(f t> J'J f} $ f'vJl/$ jI"\f 3. List your spouse's employment history for the past two years, most recent employer first. (Gross monthly pay is beJore taxes or other deductions) Employer Address Dates of employment Gross monthly Day $:)d", E""'O\DLJ A, (J Q;3 '/2. '-v/-eCU"< 2, 000 $ $ 4. How much cash do you and your spouse have? $ Q Below, state any money you or your spouse have in bank accounts or in any other financial institution, Financial institution Type of account Amount you have Amount your spouse has " N fA $ $ I $ $ $ $ If you are a prisoner, you must attach a statement certified by the appropriate institutional officer showing all receipts, expenditures, and balances during the last six months in your institutional accounts, If you have multiple accounts, perhaps because you have been in multiple institutions, attach one certified statement of each account. Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 2 Filed 05/26/17 Page 3 of 5 Page 3 of 5 AO 239 (Rev. 01115) Application to Proceed in District Court Without Prepaying Fees or Costs (Long Form) 5. List the assets, and their values, which you own or your spouse owns. Do not list clothing and ordinary household furnishings. Assets owned by you or your spouse Home (Value) $ ·0 Other real estate (Value) $ () Motor vehicle #1 (Value) $ L),c;::i) Make and year: ~coy/Lef-\J,~(Q'I.-Model: 'J» Registration #: Motor vehicle #2 (Value) $ () Make and year: Model: Registration #: N/A Other assets (Value) $ ')JrA~ Other assets (Value) $ f\Jtfi 6. State every person, business, or organization owing you or your spouse money, and the amount owed. Person owing you or your spouse Amount owed to you Amount owed to your spouse mouey Nk $ $ $ $ $ $ 7. State the persons who rely on you or your spouse for support. Name (or, if under 18, initials only) Relationship Age ~J IA Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 2 Filed 05/26/17 Page 4 of 5 Page 4 of 5 AO 239 (Rev. 0 (115) Application to Proceed in District Court Without Prepaying Fees or Costs (Long Fonn) 8. Estimate the average monthly expenses of you and your family. Show separately the amounts paid by your spouse. Adjust any payments that are made weekly, biweekly, quarterly, semiannually, or annually to show the monthly rate. ~\1\t-LDO.r1~..s, Rent or home-mortgage payment (including lot rented/or mobile home) Are real estate taxes included? o Yes o No $ $ Is property insurance included? 0 Yes o No 1,050/7V'O, Utilities (electricity, heating/uel, water, sewer, and telephone) $ $ l'6l"l~ Home maintenance (repairs and upkeep) $ $ (J Food $ $ 100/fhr'o. Clothing $ $ ('\ Laundry and dry-cleaning $ $ <::) Medical and dental expenses $ $ 25o(M,,-., Transportation (not including motor vehicle payments) $ $1&0!rro, Recreation, entertainment, newspapers, magazines, etc. $ $ 0 Insurance (not deducted/rom wages or included in mortgage payments) Homeowner s or renter s: 1 1 $ $ n. Life: $ $ 6 Health: $ $ G Motor vehicle: $ $ \ I}; I hvf'> Other: $ $ 0 Taxes (not deductedfrom wages or included in mortgage payments) (specify): $ $ 0 Installment payments Motor vehicle: $ $ () Credit card (name;:' $ $ () Department store (name): $ $ 0 Other: $ $ I'l Alimony, maintenance, and support paid to others $ $ 0 Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 2 Filed 05/26/17 Page 5 of 5 Page 5 of 5 AO 239 (Rev 01115) Application to Proceed in District Court Without Prepaying Fees or Costs (Long Fonn). ',' Regular expenses for operation of business, profession, or farm (allach detailed statement) $ $ 0_ Other (specify): $ $ J $ 0.00 $ 2,551.00 Total monthly expenses: 9. Do you expect any major changes to your monthly income or expenses or in your assets or liabilities during the next 12 months? o Yes A No If yes, describe on an attached sheet. 10. Have you spent-or will you be spending-any money for expenses or attorney fees in conjunction with this lawsuit? 0 Ye~No If yes, how much? $ _ _ _ __ _ _ __ II. Provide any other information that will help explain why you cannot pay the costs of these proceedings. ~-~ C}"'"I LJ~be ~Q Q'J ~\..e ~DJ ~I')T)') ~~-' 1"1)'1 ex~ e~ptJ~ 12. Identify the city and state of your legal residence. Tucson, Arizona Your daytime phone number: (520) 481-1106 Your age: 52 Your years of schooling: 2,J \ If

SUMMONS Submitted by Tami Lee Cheatham.

Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 3 Filed 05/26/17 Page 1 of 2 AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT for the District __________ of Arizona District of __________))) TAMI LEE CHEATHAM) Plaintiff(s))) v. Civil Action No.))) NANCY A. BERRYHILL, ACTING) COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY) Defendant(s)) SUMMONS IN A CIVIL ACTION To: (Defendant’s name and address) Office of the Regional Chief Counsel, Region X Social Security Administration 701 Fifth Avenue, Suite 2900 M/S 221A Seattle, WA 98104-7075 A lawsuit has been filed against you. Within 21 days after service of this summons on you (not counting the day you received it) — or 60 days if you are the United States or a United States agency, or an officer or employee of the United States described in Fed. R. Civ. P. 12 (a)(2) or (3) — you must serve on the plaintiff an answer to the attached complaint or a motion under Rule 12 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The answer or motion must be served on the plaintiff or plaintiff’s attorney, whose name and address are: Howard D. Olinsky, Esq. Olinsky Law Group 300 S. State St., Ste. 420 Syracuse, NY 13202 If you fail to respond, judgment by default will be entered against you for the relief demanded in the complaint. You also must file your answer or motion with the court. CLERK OF COURT Date: Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 3 Filed 05/26/17 Page 2 of 2 AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action (Page 2) Civil Action No. PROOF OF SERVICE (This section should not be filed with the court unless required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 (l)) This summons for (name of individual and title, if any) was received by me on (date). u I personally served the summons on the individual at (place) on (date); or u I left the summons at the individual’s residence or usual place of abode with (name), a person of suitable age and discretion who resides there, on (date), and mailed a copy to the individual’s last known address; or u I served the summons on (name of individual), who is designated by law to accept service of process on behalf of (name of organization) on (date); or u I returned the summons unexecuted because; or u Other (specify):. My fees are $ for travel and $ for services, for a total of $ 0.00. I declare under penalty of perjury that this information is true. Date: Server’s signature Printed name and title Server’s address Additional information regarding attempted service, etc:

Summons

Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 3-1 Filed 05/26/17 Page 1 of 2 AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT for the District __________ of Arizona District of __________))) TAMI LEE CHEATHAM) Plaintiff(s))) v. Civil Action No.))) NANCY A. BERRYHILL, ACTING) COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY) Defendant(s)) SUMMONS IN A CIVIL ACTION To: (Defendant’s name and address) United States Attorney General Constitution Avenue & 10th St., NW Washington, DC 20530 A lawsuit has been filed against you. Within 21 days after service of this summons on you (not counting the day you received it) — or 60 days if you are the United States or a United States agency, or an officer or employee of the United States described in Fed. R. Civ. P. 12 (a)(2) or (3) — you must serve on the plaintiff an answer to the attached complaint or a motion under Rule 12 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The answer or motion must be served on the plaintiff or plaintiff’s attorney, whose name and address are: Howard D. Olinsky, Esq. Olinsky Law Group 300 S. State St., Ste. 420 Syracuse, NY 13202 If you fail to respond, judgment by default will be entered against you for the relief demanded in the complaint. You also must file your answer or motion with the court. CLERK OF COURT Date: Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 3-1 Filed 05/26/17 Page 2 of 2 AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action (Page 2) Civil Action No. PROOF OF SERVICE (This section should not be filed with the court unless required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 (l)) This summons for (name of individual and title, if any) was received by me on (date). u I personally served the summons on the individual at (place) on (date); or u I left the summons at the individual’s residence or usual place of abode with (name), a person of suitable age and discretion who resides there, on (date), and mailed a copy to the individual’s last known address; or u I served the summons on (name of individual), who is designated by law to accept service of process on behalf of (name of organization) on (date); or u I returned the summons unexecuted because; or u Other (specify):. My fees are $ for travel and $ for services, for a total of $ 0.00. I declare under penalty of perjury that this information is true. Date: Server’s signature Printed name and title Server’s address Additional information regarding attempted service, etc:

Summons)(DLC

Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 3-2 Filed 05/26/17 Page 1 of 2 AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT for the District __________ of Arizona District of __________))) TAMI LEE CHEATHAM) Plaintiff(s))) v. Civil Action No.))) NANCY A. BERRYHILL, ACTING) COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY) Defendant(s)) SUMMONS IN A CIVIL ACTION To: (Defendant’s name and address) United States Attorney's Office 405 W. Congress Street, Suite 4800 Tucson, AZ 85701-5040 A lawsuit has been filed against you. Within 21 days after service of this summons on you (not counting the day you received it) — or 60 days if you are the United States or a United States agency, or an officer or employee of the United States described in Fed. R. Civ. P. 12 (a)(2) or (3) — you must serve on the plaintiff an answer to the attached complaint or a motion under Rule 12 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The answer or motion must be served on the plaintiff or plaintiff’s attorney, whose name and address are: Howard D. Olinsky, Esq. Olinsky Law Group 300 S. State St., Ste. 420 Syracuse, NY 13202 If you fail to respond, judgment by default will be entered against you for the relief demanded in the complaint. You also must file your answer or motion with the court. CLERK OF COURT Date: Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 3-2 Filed 05/26/17 Page 2 of 2 AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action (Page 2) Civil Action No. PROOF OF SERVICE (This section should not be filed with the court unless required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 (l)) This summons for (name of individual and title, if any) was received by me on (date). u I personally served the summons on the individual at (place) on (date); or u I left the summons at the individual’s residence or usual place of abode with (name), a person of suitable age and discretion who resides there, on (date), and mailed a copy to the individual’s last known address; or u I served the summons on (name of individual), who is designated by law to accept service of process on behalf of (name of organization) on (date); or u I returned the summons unexecuted because; or u Other (specify):. My fees are $ for travel and $ for services, for a total of $ 0.00. I declare under penalty of perjury that this information is true. Date: Server’s signature Printed name and title Server’s address Additional information regarding attempted service, etc:

This case has been assigned to the Honorable Eric J Markovich. All future pleadings or documents should bear the correct case number: 4:17-CV-00244-TUC-EJM. Magistrate Election form attached.

Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 4 Filed 05/26/17 Page 1 of 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF ARIZONA CONSENT TO EXERCISE OF JURISDICTION BY UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE INSTRUCTIONS TO ALL PARTIES ACTION REQUIRED WITHIN 14 DAYS Pursuant to Local Rule of Civil Procedure 3.7(b), all civil cases will be randomly assigned to a U.S. District Court Judge or to a U.S. Magistrate Judge. When a case is filed and assigned to a U.S. Magistrate Judge, consent forms, for all parties, are stamped with a case number and given to the individual who is filing the case. On these forms, consent may be give to the jurisdiction of the magistrate judge by signing the consent section of the form. If all parties consent, the case will remain with the magistrate judge, pursuant to 28:636(c)(1). These cases are assigned to a magistrate judge for all purposes, including trial and final entry of judgment. Any appeal from a judgment entered by the Magistrate Judge may be taken directly to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in the same manner as an appeal from any other judgment of a district court. Consent to proceed before a Magistrate Judge is voluntary, and no adverse consequences of any kind will be felt by any party or attorney who objects to assignment of a case to the Magistrate Judge. The party filing the case or removal is responsible for serving all parties with the consent forms. If any party chooses the district judge option, the case will be randomly reassigned to a U.S. District Court Judge. To elect to have the case heard before a U.S. District Court Judge, the District Judge Option section of the form must be completed. Each party must file the completed consent form and certificate of service with the court no later than 14 days after entry of appearance. This document should be filed in paper form only and must serve a copy by mail or hand delivery upon all parties of record in the case. Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 4 Filed 05/26/17 Page 2 of 2 1 (FOR USE IN CIVIL CASES WITH MAGISTRATE JUDGE AS PRESIDER) 2 RETURN THIS FORM TO THE CLERK'S OFFICE NOT LATER THAN 3 FOURTEEN (14) DAYS FROM YOUR APPEARANCE IN THIS CASE. Do NOT electronically file this document! 4 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 6) 7) Plaintiff,) 8) vs.) 9) Case No. ______________) 10 Defendant.)) 11) CONSENT TO EXERCISE OF JURISDICTION BY 12 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 13 In accordance with provisions of Title 28, U.S.C. Sec. 636(c)(1), the undersigned (party)(counsel of record for 14 ___________________________) in the above-captioned civil matter hereby voluntarily consents to have a United States Magistrate Judge conduct any and all further proceedings in the case, including trial and entry of a final judgment, 15 with direct review by the Ninth Circuit of Appeals if an appeal is filed. 16 Date: _______________________ _________________________________ 17 Signature 18 _________________________________ Print Name 19 ========================================================= DISTRICT JUDGE OPTION 20 Pursuant to Title 28, U.S.C. Sec. 636(c)(2) the undersigned (party)(counsel of record for 21 ___________________________) in the above captioned civil matter acknowledges the availability of a United States 22 Magistrate Judge but elects to have this case randomly assigned to a United States District Judge. 23 Date: _______________________ ___________________________________ 24 Signature ___________________________________ 25 Print Name 26 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 27 I hereby certify that a true copy of the foregoing Consent was served (by mail) (by hand delivery) on all parties of record in this case, this _____ day of _________, 20___. 28 ____________________________________ Signature

ORDER granting {{2}} Motion for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis. Signed by Magistrate Judge Eric J Markovich on 6/23/17.

Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 5 Filed 06/23/17 Page 1 of 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 8 9 Tami Lee Cheatham, No. CV-17-00244-TUC-EJM 10 Plaintiff, ORDER 11 v. 12 Nancy A. Berryhill, Acting Commissioner of Social Security Administration, 13 Defendant. 14 15 On May 26, 2017, Plaintiff filed a Complaint against the Commissioner of the 16 Social Security Administration seeking a review of the Commissioner’s unfavorable 17 decision. (Doc. 1). Plaintiff also filed an Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis and 18 lodged an affidavit of inability to pay costs or give security for the commencement of this 19 action. (Doc. 2). Reviewing Plaintiff’s financial affidavit pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915, 20 the Court finds that Plaintiff is unable to pre-pay the filing fee. 21 Accordingly, 22 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED granting Plaintiff’s Motion to Proceed In Forma 23 Pauperis. (Doc. 2). 24 Dated this 23rd day of June, 2017. 25 26 27 28

SCHEDULING ORDER: Within 60 days after the answer is filed, Plaintiff must file an opening brief. Signed by Magistrate Judge Eric J Markovich on 6/23/17. (See attached PDF for complete information.)

Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 6 Filed 06/23/17 Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 8 Tami Lee Cheatham, No. CV-17-244-TUC-EJM 9 Plaintiff, SCHEDULING ORDER 10 v. 11 12 Nancy A. Berryhill, Acting Commissioner 13 of Social Security Administration, 14 Defendant. 15 Plaintiff brings this action for review of the determination of the Commissioner of 16 the Social Security Administration (the "Commissioner"). The Clerk of Court assigned 17 this case to the expedited track pursuant to Local Rule of Civil Procedure 18 16.2(b)(1)(A)(i). Pursuant to LRCiv 16.2(b)(1)(B), the Court issues this Scheduling 19 Order without holding a scheduling conference. Accordingly, 20 IT IS ORDERED that the parties must fully comply with the following deadlines 21 and procedures: 22 I. Briefing Requirements Contained in LRCiv 16.1. The parties must fully 23 comply with LRCiv 16.1 in its entirety and must strictly comply with the following 24 requirements: 25 26 (a) Opening Brief. Within sixty (60) days after the answer is filed, Plaintiff must file an opening brief addressing 27 why the Commissioner’s decision is not supported by substantial evidence or why the decision should otherwise be 28 reversed or the case remanded. Plaintiff’s opening brief must set forth all errors which Plaintiff contends entitle him or her Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 6 Filed 06/23/17 Page 2 of 3 1 to relief. The brief must also contain, under appropriate headings and in the order indicated below, the following: 2 (1) A statement of the issues presented for review, set forth 3 in separate numbered paragraphs. 4 (2) A Statement of the Case. This statement should indicate briefly the course of the proceedings and its disposition at the 5 administrative level. 6 (3) A Statement of Facts. This statement of the facts must include Plaintiff’s age, education, and work experience; a 7 summary of the physical and mental impairments alleged; a brief outline of the medical evidence; and a brief summary of 8 other relevant evidence of record. Each statement of fact must be supported by reference to the page in the record 9 where the evidence may be found. 10 (4) An argument. The argument, which may be preceded by a summary, must be divided into sections separately treating 11 each issue. Each contention must be supported by specific reference to the portion of the record [by reference to 12 specific page numbers] relied upon and by citations to statutes, regulations, and cases supporting Plaintiff’s 13 position. If any requested remand is for the purpose of taking additional evidence, such evidence must be described in the 14 opening brief, and Plaintiff’s argument must show that the additional evidence is material and that there is good cause 15 for the failure to incorporate such evidence into the record in a prior proceeding. If such additional evidence is in the form 16 of a consultation examination sought at Government expense, Plaintiff’s opening brief must make a proffer of the nature of 17 the evidence to be obtained. 18 (5) A Short Conclusion Stating the Relief Sought. 19 (b) Answering Brief. Defendant must file an answering brief within thirty (30) days after service of Plaintiff’s 20 opening brief. Defendant’s brief must (1) respond specifically to each issue raised by Plaintiff and 21 (2) conform to the requirements set forth above for Plaintiff’s brief, except that a statement of the issues, a 22 statement of the case and a statement of the facts need not be made unless Defendant is dissatisfied with Plaintiff’s 23 statement thereof. 24 (c) Reply Brief. Plaintiff may file a reply brief within fifteen (15) days after service of Defendant’s brief. 25 (d) Length of Briefs. Unless otherwise ordered by the 26 Court, the opening and answering briefs may not exceed twenty-five (25) pages, including any statement of facts, with 27 the reply brief limited to eleven (11) pages. The case will be deemed submitted as of the date on which Plaintiff’s reply 28 brief is filed or due.-2-Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 6 Filed 06/23/17 Page 3 of 3 1 (e) Oral Argument. If either party desires oral argument, it must be requested in the manner prescribed by Rule 7.2(f) of 2 the Local Rules of Civil Procedure upon the filing of the opening brief. Whether to allow oral argument is at the 3 discretion of the Court. 4 LRCiv 16.1(a)–(e) (emphasis added). 5 II. Warnings 6 In Magallanes v. Bowen, 881 F.2d 747, 750 (9th Cir. 1989), the Court of Appeals 7 explained that the Commissioner’s decision to deny benefits would be overturned "only if 8 it is not supported by substantial evidence or is based on legal error." Correspondingly, 9 under our Local Rules, a general allegation that the Commissioner committed legal error, 10 or that the Commissioner’s determination is not supported by substantial evidence, is 11 insufficient to raise that issue for review. See Greenwood v. FAA, 28 F.3d 971, 977 (9th 12 Cir. 1994) (internal citation omitted) ("We review only issues which are argued 13 specifically and distinctly in a party’s opening brief. We will not manufacture arguments 14 for an appellant, and a bare assertion does not preserve a claim...."). Accordingly, if 15 either party fails to timely file a brief in full compliance with this Order, the Court may 16 strike the non-complying brief, dismiss the case, or remand to the agency, as appropriate. 17 See generally Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). 18 Regarding courtesy copies of documents for chambers, the parties are directed to 19 review Section II(D) of the Court’s Electronic Case Filing Administrative Policies and 20 Procedures Manual, which requires that "a courtesy copy of the filing, referencing the 21 specific document number, shall be printed directly from CM/ECF." See 22 http://www.azd.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/documents/adm%20manual.pdf (emphasis 23 added). 24 Dated this 23rd day of June, 2017. 25 26 27 28-3-

Summons Issued as to Commissioner of Social Security Administration, United States Attorney General and United States Attorney's Office. *** IMPORTANT: When printing the summons, select &quot;Document and stamps&quot; or &quot;Document and comments&quot; for the seal to appear on the document.

Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 7 Filed 06/28/17 Page 1 of 2 AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT for the District __________ of Arizona District of __________))) TAMI LEE CHEATHAM) Plaintiff(s))) v. Civil Action No. CV-17-244-TUC-EJM))) NANCY A. BERRYHILL, ACTING) COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY) Defendant(s)) SUMMONS IN A CIVIL ACTION To: (Defendant’s name and address) Office of the Regional Chief Counsel, Region X Social Security Administration 701 Fifth Avenue, Suite 2900 M/S 221A Seattle, WA 98104-7075 A lawsuit has been filed against you. Within 21 days after service of this summons on you (not counting the day you received it) — or 60 days if you are the United States or a United States agency, or an officer or employee of the United States described in Fed. R. Civ. P. 12 (a)(2) or (3) — you must serve on the plaintiff an answer to the attached complaint or a motion under Rule 12 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The answer or motion must be served on the plaintiff or plaintiff’s attorney, whose name and address are: Howard D. Olinsky, Esq. Olinsky Law Group 300 S. State St., Ste. 420 Syracuse, NY 13202 If you fail to respond, judgment by default will be entered against you for the relief demanded in the complaint. You also must file your answer or motion with the court. CLERK OF COURT Date: Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk ISSUED ON 8:48 am, Jun 28, 2017 s/Brian D. Karth, Clerk Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 7 Filed 06/28/17 Page 2 of 2 AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action (Page 2) Civil Action No. PROOF OF SERVICE (This section should not be filed with the court unless required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 (l)) This summons for (name of individual and title, if any) was received by me on (date). u I personally served the summons on the individual at (place) on (date); or u I left the summons at the individual’s residence or usual place of abode with (name), a person of suitable age and discretion who resides there, on (date), and mailed a copy to the individual’s last known address; or u I served the summons on (name of individual), who is designated by law to accept service of process on behalf of (name of organization) on (date); or u I returned the summons unexecuted because; or u Other (specify):. My fees are $ for travel and $ for services, for a total of $ 0.00. I declare under penalty of perjury that this information is true. Date: Server’s signature Printed name and title Server’s address Additional information regarding attempted service, etc:

Summons

Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 7-1 Filed 06/28/17 Page 1 of 2 AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT for the District __________ of Arizona District of __________))) TAMI LEE CHEATHAM) Plaintiff(s))) v. Civil Action No.) CV-17-244-TUC-EJM)) NANCY A. BERRYHILL, ACTING) COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY) Defendant(s)) SUMMONS IN A CIVIL ACTION To: (Defendant’s name and address) United States Attorney General Constitution Avenue & 10th St., NW Washington, DC 20530 A lawsuit has been filed against you. Within 21 days after service of this summons on you (not counting the day you received it) — or 60 days if you are the United States or a United States agency, or an officer or employee of the United States described in Fed. R. Civ. P. 12 (a)(2) or (3) — you must serve on the plaintiff an answer to the attached complaint or a motion under Rule 12 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The answer or motion must be served on the plaintiff or plaintiff’s attorney, whose name and address are: Howard D. Olinsky, Esq. Olinsky Law Group 300 S. State St., Ste. 420 Syracuse, NY 13202 If you fail to respond, judgment by default will be entered against you for the relief demanded in the complaint. You also must file your answer or motion with the court. CLERK OF COURT Date: Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk ISSUED ON 8:50 am, Jun 28, 2017 s/Brian D. Karth, Clerk Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 7-1 Filed 06/28/17 Page 2 of 2 AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action (Page 2) Civil Action No. PROOF OF SERVICE (This section should not be filed with the court unless required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 (l)) This summons for (name of individual and title, if any) was received by me on (date). u I personally served the summons on the individual at (place) on (date); or u I left the summons at the individual’s residence or usual place of abode with (name), a person of suitable age and discretion who resides there, on (date), and mailed a copy to the individual’s last known address; or u I served the summons on (name of individual), who is designated by law to accept service of process on behalf of (name of organization) on (date); or u I returned the summons unexecuted because; or u Other (specify):. My fees are $ for travel and $ for services, for a total of $ 0.00. I declare under penalty of perjury that this information is true. Date: Server’s signature Printed name and title Server’s address Additional information regarding attempted service, etc:

Summons)(KEP

Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 7-2 Filed 06/28/17 Page 1 of 2 AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT for the District __________ of Arizona District of __________))) TAMI LEE CHEATHAM) Plaintiff(s))) v.) Civil Action No. CV-17-244-TUC-EJM)) NANCY A. BERRYHILL, ACTING) COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY) Defendant(s)) SUMMONS IN A CIVIL ACTION To: (Defendant’s name and address) United States Attorney's Office 405 W. Congress Street, Suite 4800 Tucson, AZ 85701-5040 A lawsuit has been filed against you. Within 21 days after service of this summons on you (not counting the day you received it) — or 60 days if you are the United States or a United States agency, or an officer or employee of the United States described in Fed. R. Civ. P. 12 (a)(2) or (3) — you must serve on the plaintiff an answer to the attached complaint or a motion under Rule 12 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The answer or motion must be served on the plaintiff or plaintiff’s attorney, whose name and address are: Howard D. Olinsky, Esq. Olinsky Law Group 300 S. State St., Ste. 420 Syracuse, NY 13202 If you fail to respond, judgment by default will be entered against you for the relief demanded in the complaint. You also must file your answer or motion with the court. CLERK OF COURT Date: Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk ISSUED ON 8:50 am, Jun 28, 2017 s/Brian D. Karth, Clerk Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 7-2 Filed 06/28/17 Page 2 of 2 AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action (Page 2) Civil Action No. PROOF OF SERVICE (This section should not be filed with the court unless required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 (l)) This summons for (name of individual and title, if any) was received by me on (date). u I personally served the summons on the individual at (place) on (date); or u I left the summons at the individual’s residence or usual place of abode with (name), a person of suitable age and discretion who resides there, on (date), and mailed a copy to the individual’s last known address; or u I served the summons on (name of individual), who is designated by law to accept service of process on behalf of (name of organization) on (date); or u I returned the summons unexecuted because; or u Other (specify):. My fees are $ for travel and $ for services, for a total of $ 0.00. I declare under penalty of perjury that this information is true. Date: Server’s signature Printed name and title Server’s address Additional information regarding attempted service, etc:

Magistrate Election Form Deadline resent on this date.

Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 8 Filed 07/12/17 Page 1 of 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF ARIZONA CONSENT TO EXERCISE OF JURISDICTION BY UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE INSTRUCTIONS TO ALL PARTIES ACTION REQUIRED WITHIN 14 DAYS Pursuant to Local Rule of Civil Procedure 3.7(a), all civil cases will be randomly assigned to a U.S. District Court Judge or to a U.S. Magistrate Judge. When a case is filed and assigned to a U.S. Magistrate Judge, consent forms, for all parties, are stamped with a case number and given to the individual who is filing the case. On these forms, consent may be give to the jurisdiction of the magistrate judge by signing the consent section of the form. If all parties consent, the case will remain with the magistrate judge, pursuant to 28:636(c)(1). These cases are assigned to a magistrate judge for all purposes, including trial and final entry of judgment. Any appeal from a judgment entered by the Magistrate Judge may be taken directly to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in the same manner as an appeal from any other judgment of a district court. Consent to proceed before a Magistrate Judge is voluntary, and no adverse consequences of any kind will be felt by any party or attorney who objects to assignment of a case to the Magistrate Judge. The party filing the case or removal is responsible for serving all parties with the consent forms. If any party chooses the district judge option, the case will be randomly reassigned to a U.S. District Court Judge. To elect to have the case heard before a U.S. District Court Judge, the District Judge Option section of the form must be completed. Each party must file the completed consent form and certificate of service with the court no later than 14 days after entry of appearance. This document should be filed in paper form only and must serve a copy by mail or hand delivery upon all parties of record in the case. Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 8 Filed 07/12/17 Page 2 of 2 ✁ ✂ ✄ ☎ ✆ ✝ ✞ ✟ ✠ ✞ ✡ ✞ ☛ ✠ ☞ ✆ ✝ ✆ ✌ ✞ ✍ ✎ ✏ ☞ ✑ ✞ ✆ ✍ ✄ ☞ ✍ ✝ ✒ ☎ ✓ ✑ ✝ ☞ ✆ ✔ ✄ ✝ ✆ ✞ ✓ ✝ ✄ ✕ ✖ ✗ ✘ ✙ ✖ ✚ ✘ ✛ ✜ ✢ ✣ ✤ ✖ ✥ ✘ ✤ ✘ ✛ ✗ ✦ ✧ ✗ ✖ ★ ✩ ✢ ✤ ✣ ✣ ✜ ✦ ✗ ✚ ✤ ✘ ✧ ✪ ✘ ✗ ✖ ✘ ✛ ✪ ✚ ✣ ✤ ✙ ✖ ✘ ✗ ✗ ✚ ✫ ✬ ✭ ✮ ✯ ✪ ✰ ✢ ✣ ✖ ✤ ✥ ✰ ✤ ✙ ✖ ✪ ✱ ✱ ✗ ✪ ✖ ✪ ✚ ✦ ✗ ✜ ✚ ✘ ✛ ✜ ✢ ✦ ✪ ✢ ✗ ✲ ✯ ✳ ✚ ✤ ✘ ✴ ✵ ✴ ✶ ✷ ✸ ✳ ✹ ✺ ✶ ✻ ✵ ✵ ✼ ✽ ✺ ✵ ✴ ✷ ✾ ✺ ✿ ❀ ✳ ✶ ❁ ❂ ✴ ✹ ✷ ❃ ❄ ❅ ❆ ❇ ❈ ❆ ❉ ❉ ❅ ❈ ❊ ❈ ❋ ❄ ● ❇ ❈ ❅ ❍ ■ ❏ ❋ ● ❇ ❑ ● ❄ ❉ ● ❅ ❆ ▲ ▼ ❏ ❆ ● ❉ ❈ ❑ ❇ ❉ ◆ ❉ ❈ ❇ ❖ ◆ € ● ❇ ❉ ❋ ◆ ❉ ❈ ■ ❏ ❑ € ❈ ◗ ❘ ❙ ❚ ❚ ❯ ❱ ❲ ❙ ❘ ❚ ❳ ❨ ❩ ❬ ❭ ❪ ❱ ❯ ❫ ❩ ❴ ❩ ❯ ❘ ❴ ❯ ❵ ❛ ❩ ❬ ❜ ❳ ❝ ❞ ❡ ❢ ❣ ❤ ❣ ✐ ❣ ❤ ❳ ❚ ❣ ❥ ❦ ❥ ❧ ❚ ♠ ❧ ♥ ♠ ❡ ❬ ❭ ❳ ♦ ❘ ❲ ❳ ❱ ❴ ❩ ♣ ❘ ❳ ❲ ❧ ❪ ❙ ❱ ❬ q ♠ ❧ ❚ ❯ ♦ ❘ ❴ ❳ ❜ ❯ ❵ ❱ ❳ ❚ ❯ ❱ ❲ ❵ ❯ ❱ ♠ ❩ ❘ ❬ ❭ ❳ ❙ s ❯ ❫ ❳ t ❚ ❙ ❪ ❬ ❩ ❯ ❘ ❳ ❲ ❚ ❩ ❫ ❩ ❜ ✉ ❙ ❬ ❬ ❳ ❱ ❭ ❳ ❱ ❳ s q ❫ ❯ ❜ ♦ ❘ ❬ ❙ ❱ ❩ ❜ q ❚ ❯ ❘ ❴ ❳ ❘ ❬ ❴ ❬ ❯ ❭ ❙ ❫ ❳ ❙ ❢ ❘ ❩ ❬ ❳ ❲ r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r ❤ ❬ ❙ ❬ ❳ ❴ ✈ ❙ ♣ ❩ ❴ ❬ ❱ ❙ ❬ ❳ ✇ ♦ ❲ ♣ ❳ ❚ ❯ ❘ ❲ ♦ ❚ ❬ ❙ ❘ q ❙ ❘ ❲ ❙ ❜ ❜ ❵ ♦ ❱ ❬ ❭ ❳ ❱ ❪ ❱ ❯ ❚ ❳ ❳ ❲ ❩ ❘ ♣ ❴ ❩ ❘ ❬ ❭ ❳ ❚ ❙ ❴ ❳ ❡ ❩ ❘ ❚ ❜ ♦ ❲ ❩ ❘ ♣ ❬ ❱ ❩ ❙ ❜ ❙ ❘ ❲ ❳ ❘ ❬ ❱ q ❯ ❵ ❙ ❵ ❩ ❘ ❙ ❜ ① ♦ ❲ ♣ ✉ ❳ ❘ ❬ ❡ ❨ ❩ ❬ ❭ ❲ ❩ ❱ ❳ ❚ ❬ ❱ ❳ ❫ ❩ ❳ ❨ s q ❬ ❭ ❳ ② ❩ ❘ ❬ ❭ ✐ ❩ ❱ ❚ ♦ ❩ ❬ ❯ ❵ ③ ❪ ❪ ❳ ❙ ❜ ❴ ❩ ❵ ❙ ❘ ❙ ❪ ❪ ❳ ❙ ❜ ❩ ❴ ❵ ❩ ❜ ❳ ❲ ❣ ④ ❙ ❬ ❳ ⑤ r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r ❤ ❩ ♣ ❘ ❙ ❬ ♦ ❱ ❳ r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r ⑥ ❱ ❩ ❘ ❬ ② ❙ ✉ ❳ ⑦ ⑦ ⑦ ⑦ ⑦ ⑦ ⑦ ⑦ ⑦ ⑦ ⑦ ⑦ ⑦ ⑦ ⑦ ⑦ ⑦ ⑦ ⑦ ⑦ ⑦ ⑦ ⑦ ⑦ ⑦ ⑦ ⑦ ⑦ ⑦ ⑦ ⑦ ⑦ ⑦ ⑦ ⑦ ⑦ ⑦ ⑦ ⑦ ⑦ ⑦ ⑦ ⑦ ⑦ ⑦ ⑦ ⑦ ⑦ ⑦ ⑦ ⑦ ⑦ ⑦ ⑦ ⑦ ⑦ ⑦ ❑ ● ❇ ❉ ❋ ● ❄ ❉ ■ ❏ ❑ € ❈ ❅ ⑧ ❉ ● ❅ ❆ ⑥ ♦ ❱ ❴ ♦ ❙ ❘ ❬ ❬ ❯ ❛ ❩ ❬ ❜ ❳ ❝ ❞ ❡ ❢ ❣ ❤ ❣ ✐ ❣ ❤ ❳ ❚ ❣ ❥ ❦ ❥ ❧ ❚ ♠ ❧ ❝ ♠ ❬ ❭ ❳ ♦ ❘ ❲ ❳ ❱ ❴ ❩ ♣ ❘ ❳ ❲ ❧ ❪ ❙ ❱ ❬ q ♠ ❧ ❚ ❯ ♦ ❘ ❴ ❳ ❜ ❯ ❵ ❱ ❳ ❚ ❯ ❱ ❲ ❵ ❯ ❱ ♠ ❩ ❘ ❬ ❭ ❳ ❙ s ❯ ❫ ❳ ❚ ❙ ❪ ❬ ❩ ❯ ❘ ❳ ❲ ❚ ❩ ❫ ❩ ❜ ✉ ❙ ❬ ❬ ❳ ❱ ❙ ❚ ⑨ ❘ ❯ ❨ ❜ ❳ ❲ ♣ ❳ ❴ ❬ ❭ ❳ ❙ ❫ ❙ ❩ ❜ ❙ s ❩ ❜ ❩ ❬ q ❯ ❵ ❙ ❢ ❘ ❩ ❬ ❳ ❲ ❤ ❬ ❙ ❬ ❳ ❴ r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r ✈ ❙ ♣ ❩ ❴ ❬ ❱ ❙ ❬ ❳ ✇ ♦ ❲ ♣ ❳ s ♦ ❬ ❳ ❜ ❳ ❚ ❬ ❴ ❬ ❯ ❭ ❙ ❫ ❳ ❬ ❭ ❩ ❴ ❚ ❙ ❴ ❳ ❱ ❙ ❘ ❲ ❯ ✉ ❜ q ❙ ❴ ❴ ❩ ♣ ❘ ❳ ❲ ❬ ❯ ❙ ❢ ❘ ❩ ❬ ❳ ❲ ❤ ❬ ❙ ❬ ❳ ❴ ④ ❩ ❴ ❬ ❱ ❩ ❚ ❬ ✇ ♦ ❲ ♣ ❳ ❣ ④ ❙ ❬ ❳ ⑤ r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r ❤ ❩ ♣ ❘ ❙ ❬ ♦ ❱ ❳ r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r ⑥ ❱ ❩ ❘ ❬ ② ❙ ✉ ❳ ❄ ❈ ❋ ❉ ● ❍ ● ❄ ◆ ❉ ❈ ❅ ❍ ❇ ❈ ❋ ⑩ ● ❄ ❈ ◗ ❭ ❳ ❱ ❳ s q ❚ ❳ ❱ ❬ ❩ ❵ q ❬ ❭ ❙ ❬ ❙ ❬ ❱ ♦ ❳ ❚ ❯ ❪ q ❯ ❵ ❬ ❭ ❳ ❵ ❯ ❱ ❳ ♣ ❯ ❩ ❘ ♣ ✐ ❯ ❘ ❴ ❳ ❘ ❬ ❨ ❙ ❴ ❴ ❳ ❱ ❫ ❳ ❲ ❧ s q ✉ ❙ ❩ ❜ ♠ ❧ s q ❭ ❙ ❘ ❲ ❲ ❳ ❜ ❩ ❫ ❳ ❱ q ♠ ❯ ❘ ❙ ❜ ❜ ❪ ❙ ❱ ❬ ❩ ❳ ❴ ❯ ❵ ❱ ❳ ❚ ❯ ❱ ❲ ❩ ❘ ❬ ❭ ❩ ❴ ❚ ❙ ❴ ❳ ❡ ❬ ❭ ❩ ❴ ❲ ❙ q ❯ ❵ ❡ ❝ ❶ ❣ r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r ❤ ❩ ♣ ❘ ❙ ❬ ♦ ❱ ❳

SERVICE EXECUTED filed by Tami Lee Cheatham: Return of Service re: Summons, Complaint and Scheduling Order upon US Attorney's Office, Office of General Counsel, Attorney General on 7/20/2017.

Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 9 Filed 07/27/17 Page 2 of 6 Date Produced: 07/24/2017 WALZ GROUP: The following is the delivery information for Certified Mail™/RRE item number 9314 8699 0430 0036 4808 56. Our records indicate that this item was delivered on 07/17/2017 at 04:33 p.m. in TUCSON, AZ 85701. The scanned image of the recipient information is provided below. Signature of Recipient: Address of Recipient: Thank you for selecting the Postal Service for your mailing needs. If you require additional assistance, please contact your local post office or Postal Service representative. Sincerely, United States Postal Service Information in this section provided by Walz Group, LLC. Recipient Information: Civil Process Clerk United States Attorney's Office District of Arizona 405 W. Congress Street, Suite 4800 Tucson,AZ 85701 Reference Number: Cheatham, T USAO Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 9 Filed 07/27/17 Page 4 of 6 Date Produced: 07/24/2017 WALZ GROUP: The following is the delivery information for Certified Mail™/RRE item number 9314 8699 0430 0036 4811 36. Our records indicate that this item was delivered on 07/18/2017 at 10:35 a.m. in SEATTLE, WA 98104. The scanned image of the recipient information is provided below. Signature of Recipient: Address of Recipient: Thank you for selecting the Postal Service for your mailing needs. If you require additional assistance, please contact your local post office or Postal Service representative. Sincerely, United States Postal Service Information in this section provided by Walz Group, LLC. Recipient Information: Office of Regional Chief Counsel Region X, SSA 701 Fifth Avenue, Suite 2900 M/S 221A Seattle,WA 98104 Reference Number: Cheatham, T OGC Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 9 Filed 07/27/17 Page 6 of 6 Date Produced: 07/24/2017 WALZ GROUP: The following is the delivery information for Certified Mail™/RRE item number 9314 8699 0430 0036 4811 67. Our records indicate that this item was delivered on 07/20/2017 at 05:24 a.m. in WASHINGTON, DC 20530. The scanned image of the recipient information is provided below. Signature of Recipient: Address of Recipient: Thank you for selecting the Postal Service for your mailing needs. If you require additional assistance, please contact your local post office or Postal Service representative. Sincerely, United States Postal Service Information in this section provided by Walz Group, LLC. Recipient Information: U.S. Attorney General Constitution Avenue & 10th St., N.W. Washington,DC 20530 Reference Number: Cheatham, T AG

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE for failure to comply with LRCiv 3.7(b). Show Cause Hearing is set for 9/11/17 at 10:20 AM, before Chief Judge Raner C Collins.

Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 10 Filed 08/03/17 Page 1 of 2 1 2 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 3 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 4 5 Tami Lee Cheatham,) 6) 7 Plaintiff) v.) CV-17-00244-TUC-EJM 8) ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE 9 Commissioner of Social Security) 10 Administration,)) 11 Defendant(s).) 12) 13 This action has been assigned to a United States Magistrate Judge 14 pursuant to LRCiv 3.7(b) of the United States District Court for the 15 District of Arizona. Each party is required to execute and file within 16 fourteen days of its appearance either a written consent to the 17 exercise of authority by the magistrate judge under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), 18 or a written election to have the action reassigned to a district 19 judge. Plaintiff appeared in this action more than fourteen days ago, 20 but has not yet filed the required election form. 21 IT IS ORDERED that if the above listed plaintiff fails to file the 22 appropriate election form by 5:00 p.m. on September 8, 2017, the above 23 plaintiff shall appear1 before Chief Judge Raner C. Collins of the 24 Tucson Division of this Court at 405 W Congress, 5th Floor, Tucson, 25 Arizona at 10:20 am on Monday, September 11, 2017 and show good cause 26 27 28 Incarcerated parties shall appear telephonically and shall make arrangements for such appearance in advance of the hearing. 1 Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 10 Filed 08/03/17 Page 2 of 2 1 for the failure to comply with Local Rule LRCiv 3.7(b). The hearing 2 before the Judge will be automatically vacated and the party need not 3 appear if the party files a completed election form by the 5:00 p.m. 4 deadline set forth above. An additional copy of the election form is 5 included with this Order. 6 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the assignment of this action to the 7 Magistrate Judge remains in effect for all purposes pending completion 8 of the election process. Involvement of Judge Collins in this matter 9 is limited to this show cause hearing, unless the magistrate judge 10 assignment is ordered withdrawn pursuant to 28 U. S. C. § 636(b)(1)(A), 11 at which time the case would be randomly reassigned to a district 12 judge. 13 14 DATED this 3rd day of August, 2017. 15 16 BRIAN D. KARTH 17 District Court Executive/Clerk of Court 18 19 20 21 By:S/B. Cortez Deputy Clerk 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

NOTICE OF ATTORNEY APPEARANCE: Sarah Moum appearing for Commissioner of Social Security Administration.

Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 12 Filed 08/17/17 Page 1 of 2 1 Elizabeth A. Strange Acting United States Attorney 2 District of Arizona 3 Sarah Moum 4 Special Assistant United States Attorney 5 Office of the General Counsel Social Security Administration 6 701 Fifth Avenue, Suite 2900 M/S 221A 7 Seattle, WA 98104-7075 State Bar No. WA42086 8 Fax: (206) 615-2531 sarah.moum@ssa.gov 9 Telephone: (206) 615-2936 10 Of Attorneys for the Defendant 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 12 DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 13 Tami Lee Cheatham, 14 No. CV-17-244-TUC-EJM 15 Plaintiff, 16 DEFENDANT’S NOTICE OF vs. APPEARANCE 17 Nancy A. Berryhill, 18 Acting Commissioner of Social Security, 19 Defendant. 20 21 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that Defendant Commissioner of Social Security 22 23 hereby notifies Plaintiff and this Court that the following Special Assistant U.S. 24 Attorney will appear as counsel of record in the above-captioned case: 25 Sarah Moum 26 Special Assistant United States Attorney 27 Office of the General Counsel Social Security Administration 28 701 Fifth Avenue, Suite 2900 M/S 221A Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 12 Filed 08/17/17 Page 2 of 2 1 Seattle, WA 98104-7075 State Bar No. WA42086 2 Fax: (206) 615-2531 3 sarah.moum@ssa.gov Telephone: (206) 615-2936 4 5 DATED this 17th day of August 2017. 6 Respectfully submitted, 7 ELIZABETH A. STRANGE 8 Acting United States Attorney 9 District of Arizona 10 s/Sarah Moum 11 SARAH MOUM Special Assistant United States Attorney 12 13 Of Counsel for the Defendant: 14 MATHEW W. PILE 15 Acting Regional Chief Counsel, Social Security Administration Office of the General Counsel, Region X 16 701 Fifth Avenue, Suite 2900 M/S 221A Seattle, WA 98104-7075 17 18 19 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 20 I hereby certify that the foregoing Notice of Appearance was filed with the Clerk 21 of the Court on August 17, 2017, using the CM/ECF system which will send notification 22 23 of such filing to the following: Howard D Olinsky. 24 25 s/Timothy Shaw TIMOTHY SHAW 26 Paralegal Specialist Office of the General Counsel 27 28 2

ANSWER to [1] Complaint by Commissioner of Social Security Administration.

Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 15 Filed 09/15/17 Page 1 of 3 1 Elizabeth A. Strange Acting United States Attorney 2 District of Arizona 3 Sarah Moum 4 Special Assistant United States Attorney 5 Office of the General Counsel Social Security Administration 6 701 Fifth Avenue, Suite 2900 M/S 221A 7 Seattle, WA 98104-7075 State Bar No. WA42086 8 Fax: (206) 615-2531 sarah.moum@ssa.gov 9 Telephone: (206) 615-2936 10 Of Attorneys for the Defendant 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 12 DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 13 Tami Lee Cheatham, No. 4:17-CV-00244-TUC-EJM 14 15 Plaintiff, 16 ANSWER vs. 17 Nancy A. Berryhill, 18 Acting Commissioner of Social Security, 19 Defendant. 20 21 Defendant, in answer to Plaintiff’s complaint, admits, denies and alleges as 22 follows: 23 1. Defendant admits the allegations contained Paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 5. 24 25 2. Defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraphs 6, 7, and 8. 26 3. Defendant lacks sufficient knowledge sufficient to form a belief about the 27 allegations in Paragraph 4, except that Plaintiff’s social security number is a matter of 28 Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 15 Filed 09/15/17 Page 2 of 3 1 record. 2 4. The remainder of the Complaint is a prayer for relief, including a request for 3 attorney’s fees. Defendant denies that Plaintiff is entitled to judgment or any requested 4 5 relief. 6 5. Defendant denies all allegations of the complaint not specifically admitted. 7 6. In accordance with 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), Defendant files as part of the answer a 8 certified copy of the transcript of the record including the evidence upon which 9 10 Defendant based the challenged decision. 11 WHEREFORE, Defendant prays for judgment dismissing the complaint, with 12 costs, and for judgment in accordance with 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), affirming Defendant’s 13 14 decision. 15 16 DATED this 15th day of September 2017. 17 Respectfully submitted, 18 ELIZABETH A. STRANGE 19 Acting United States Attorney District of Arizona 20 21 s/Sarah Moum SARAH MOUM 22 Special Assistant United States Attorney 23 24 Of Counsel for the Defendant: 25 MATHEW W. PILE 26 Acting Regional Chief Counsel, Social Security Administration 27 Office of the General Counsel, Region X 701 Fifth Avenue, Suite 2900 M/S 221A 28 Seattle, WA 98104-7075 2 Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 15 Filed 09/15/17 Page 3 of 3 1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 2 I hereby certify that the foregoing Answer was filed with the Clerk of the 3 Court on September 15, 2017, using the CM/ECF system, which will send 4 5 notification of such filing to the following: Howard D Olinsky. 6 7 s/Megan Moore MEGAN MOORE 8 Paralegal Specialist 9 Office of the General Counsel 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3

NOTICE of Filing Certified Copy of Administrative Transcript re: [15] Answer to Complaint filed by Commissioner of Social Security Administration.

Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 16 Filed 09/15/17 Page 1 of 2 1 Elizabeth A. Strange Acting United States Attorney 2 District of Arizona 3 Sarah Moum 4 Special Assistant United States Attorney 5 Office of the General Counsel Social Security Administration 6 701 Fifth Avenue, Suite 2900 M/S 221A 7 Seattle, WA 98104-7075 State Bar No. WA42086 8 Fax: (206) 615-2531 sarah.moum@ssa.gov 9 Telephone: (206) 615-2936 10 Of Attorneys for the Defendant 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 12 DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 13 Tami Lee Cheatham, No. 4:17-CV-00244-TUC-EJM 14 15 Plaintiff, 16 NOTICE OF FILING CERTIFIED vs. ADMINISTRATIVE/TRANSCRIPT 17 OF RECORD Nancy A. Berryhill, 18 Acting Commissioner of Social Security, 19 Defendant. 20 21 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE the Acting Commissioner of the Social Security 22 Administration, by and through Sarah Moum, Special Assistant United States 23 Attorney for the District of Arizona, files herein in accordance with section 205(g) of the 24 25 Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), as part of the answer a certified electronic copy 26 of the transcript of the record including the evidence upon which the findings and 27 decision complained of are based. In addition, a paper copy was delivered to the court. 28 Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 16 Filed 09/15/17 Page 2 of 2 1 DATED this 15th day of September 2017. 2 3 Respectfully submitted, 4 ELIZABETH A. STRANGE 5 Acting United States Attorney District of Arizona 6 s/Sarah Moum 7 SARAH MOUM 8 Special Assistant United States Attorney 9 Of Counsel for the Defendant: 10 MATHEW W. PILE 11 Acting Regional Chief Counsel, Social Security Administration 12 Office of the General Counsel, Region X 701 Fifth Avenue, Suite 2900 M/S 221A 13 Seattle, WA 98104-7075 14 15 16 17 18 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 19 20 I hereby certify that the foregoing Notice of Filing Certified 21 Administrative/Transcript of Record was filed with the Clerk of the Court on 22 September 15, 2017, using the CM/ECF system, which will send notification of 23 such filing to the following: Howard D Olinsky. 24 25 26 s/Megan Moore MEGAN MOORE 27 Paralegal Specialist 28 Office of the General Counsel 2

Certification Page

Case 4: 17-cv-00244-EJIM Document 16-1 Filed 09/15/17 Page 1 of 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA TUCSON DIVISION TAMI LEE CHEATHAM, Plaintiff VS.) CIVIL ACTION NO. 17CV00244 NANCY A. BERRY HILL ACTING COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY Defendant CERTIFICATION The undersigned, as Chief, Court Case Preparation and Review Branch 1, Office of Appellate Operations, Office of Disability Adjudication and Review, Social Security Administration, hereby certifies that the documents annexed hereto constitute a full and accurate transcript of the entire record of proceedings s relating to this case. NANCY CHUNG Date: August 23, 2017 * * * Certified Administrative Records (CAR) are not compatible with Optical Character Recognition (OCR), therefore the Agency cannot provide an OCR searchable CAR.

Court Transcript Index

Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 16-2 Filed 09/15/17 Page 1 of 3 Court Transcript Index Civil Action Number: 4:17-CV-00244 Claimant: Tami Lee Cheatham Account Number: 347-64-3768 No. of Court Transcript Index Page No. Pages AC Denial (ACDENY), dated 03/24/2017 1-7 7 Appointment of Representative (1696), dated 02/01/2016 8-9 2 AC Correspondence (ACCORR), dated 01/11/2016 10-16 7 Request for Review of Hearing Decision/Order (HA 520), dated 17-24 8 01/11/2016 ALJ Hearing Decision (ALJDEC), dated 12/29/2015 25-50 26 Transcript of Oral Hearing (TRANHR), dated 11/13/2015 51-83 33 Exhibits Exhibit No. of No. Description Page No. Pages 1A Disability Determination Transmittal, dated 07/30/2013 84 1 2A Disability Determination Explanation, dated 07/30/2013 85-98 14 3A Disability Determination Transmittal, dated 02/06/2014 99 1 4A Disability Determination Explanation, dated 02/06/2014 100-116 17 1B T2 Notice of Disapproved Claim, dated 07/30/2013 117-120 4 2B Request for Reconsideration, dated 09/10/2013 121 1 3B T2 Disability Reconsideration Notice, dated 02/06/2014 122-124 3 4B Representative Fee Agreement, dated 03/22/2014 125 1 5B Request for Hearing by ALJ, dated 03/25/2014 126 1 6B Appointment of Representative, dated 04/01/2014 127 1 7B Request for Hearing Acknowledgement Letter, dated 128-135 8 04/04/2014 8B Request for Hearing Acknowledgement Letter, dated 136-143 8 07/22/2014 9B Transfer Request for Hearing, dated 07/10/2015 144-150 7 10B Hearing Notice, dated 08/25/2015 151-170 20 11B Acknowledge Notice of Hearing, dated 08/28/2015 171 1 12B Resume of Vocational Expert 172-173 2 13B Representative Fee Agreement, dated 10/23/2015 174 1 14B Appointment of Representative, dated 10/23/2015 175 1 15B Notice Of Hearing Reminder, dated 10/30/2015 176-181 6 1D Application for Disability Insurance Benefits, dated 182-183 2 04/08/2013 2D Detailed Earnings Query, dated 08/11/2015 184-189 6 3D Summary Earnings Query, dated 08/11/2015 190 1 4D WHAT-Work History Assistant Tool, dated 08/11/2015 191 1 5D Misc Non-Disability Development, dated 08/11/2015 192 1 6D Misc Non-Disability Development, dated 08/11/2015 193-194 2 DATE: August 23, 2017 The documents and exhibits contained in this administrative record are the best copies obtainable. Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 16-2 Filed 09/15/17 Page 2 of 3 Court Transcript Index Civil Action Number: 4:17-CV-00244 Claimant: Tami Lee Cheatham Account Number: 347-64-3768 Exhibits Exhibit No. of No. Description Page No. Pages 7D New Hire, Quarter Wage, Unemployment Query (NDNH), 195 1 dated 11/04/2015 1E Report of Contact, dated 04/08/2013 196 1 2E Disability Report-Field Office, dated 04/08/2013 197-198 2 3E Work History Report, dated 05/01/2013 199-209 11 4E Disability Report-Adult, dated 05/01/2013 210-225 16 5E 3rd Party Function Report-Adult, dated 06/21/2013, from 226-233 8 Charles Edward Cheatham 6E Work History Report, dated 06/21/2013, from claimant 234-241 8 7E Function Report-Adult, dated 06/21/2013, from claimant 242-250 9 8E Disability Report-Appeals, dated 09/15/2013 251-258 8 9E Disability Report-Field Office, dated 09/17/2013 259-260 2 10E Report of Contact, dated 09/19/2013 261 1 11E Function Report-Adult, dated 11/21/2013, from claimant 262-274 13 12E Headache Questionnaire, dated 07/25/2013 to 11/22/2013, 275-316 42 from claimant 13E Statement of Claimant or Other Person, dated 03/25/2014, 317 1 from claimant 14E Report of Contact, dated 03/29/2014 318 1 15E Disability Report-Field Office, dated 03/29/2014 319-320 2 16E Exhibit List-CD to Representative or Claimant Form # HA-L56 321-331 11 (03-200), dated 08/11/2015 17E Medications, dated 11/23/2015, from Tami Cheatham 332 1 18E Representative Brief, dated 02/03/2016 to 02/03/2016 333-336 4 1F Office Treatment Records, dated 03/17/2003 to 02/23/2004, 337-373 37 from Northwest Medical Center 2F Progress Notes, dated 12/23/2004 to 03/29/2005, from 374-412 39 Proactive Physical Therapy 3F Office Treatment Records, dated 01/12/2012, from Pain 413-414 2 Institute of Southern Arizona 4F Office Treatment Records, dated 01/05/2012 to 11/12/2012, 415-430 16 from Orang grove Family Practice-ACP 5F Emergency Department Records, dated 03/30/2013 to 431-436 6 03/31/2013, from Northwest Medical Center 6F Office Treatment Records, dated 01/30/2003 to 04/09/2013, 437-878 442 from Arizona Community Physicians 7F Office Treatment Records, dated 03/12/2013 to 06/03/2013, 879-901 23 from Marana Health Center 8F CE Psychiatry, dated 07/29/2013, from Hunter Yost M.D. 902-905 4 DATE: August 23, 2017 The documents and exhibits contained in this administrative record are the best copies obtainable. Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 16-2 Filed 09/15/17 Page 3 of 3 Court Transcript Index Civil Action Number: 4:17-CV-00244 Claimant: Tami Lee Cheatham Account Number: 347-64-3768 Exhibits Exhibit No. of No. Description Page No. Pages 9F Office Treatment Records, dated 07/25/2013 to 08/09/2013, 906-914 9 from Jeffrey B. Loomer, M.D. 10F Office Treatment Records, dated 08/13/2013 to 11/08/2013, 915-937 23 from Marana Health Center 11F Misc Medical Records, dated 03/29/2014, from Yusuf Mathal, 938 1 MD 12F Office Treatment Records, dated 03/09/2015 to 06/17/2015, 939-975 37 from Vitamedica Institute 13F Medical Source Statement-Physical, dated 08/25/2015, from 976-978 3 Michale Lokale, DO 14F Hospital Records, dated 04/22/2014 to 08/06/2014, from Oro 979-997 19 Valley Hospital 15F Office Treatment Records, dated 07/18/2014 to 10/24/2014, 998-1027 30 from Samir Patel 16F Hospital Records, dated 03/27/2014 to 05/13/2015, from 1028-1060 33 Northwest Medical Center 17F Office Treatment Records, dated 02/07/2014 to 04/03/2014, 1061-1071 11 from YUSUF MAHTAI 18F Office Treatment Records, dated 04/22/2014 to 12/16/2014, 1072-1087 16 from Dr. Rivero 19F Office Treatment Records, dated 02/09/2015 to 02/09/2015, 1088-1089 2 from Dr. Zeiller 20F Medical Source Statement-Physical, dated 10/19/2015, from 1090-1093 4 Michael Lokale, DO 21F Medical Source Statement-Mental, dated 10/19/2015, from 1094-1098 5 Michael Lokale, DO 22F Office Treatment Notes, dated 04/08/2014 to 10/20/2015, 1099-1195 97 from Michael Lokale, DO DATE: August 23, 2017 The documents and exhibits contained in this administrative record are the best copies obtainable.

Documents Related to Administrative Process Including Transcript of Oral Hearin

Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 16-3 Filed 09/15/17 Page 1 of 84 Documents Related to Administrative Process Including Transcript of Oral Hearing, if applicable Civil Action Number: 4:17-CV-00244 Claimant: Tami Lee Cheatham Account Number: 347-64-3768 No. of Court Transcript Index Page No. Pages AC Denial (ACDENY), dated 03/24/2017 1-7 7 Appointment of Representative (1696), dated 02/01/2016 8-9 2 AC Correspondence (ACCORR), dated 01/11/2016 10-16 7 Request for Review of Hearing Decision/Order (HA 520), dated 17-24 8 01/11/2016 ALJ Hearing Decision (ALJDEC), dated 12/29/2015 25-50 26 Transcript of Oral Hearing (TRANHR), dated 11/13/2015 51-83 33 DATE: August 23, 2017 The documents and exhibits contained in this administrative record are the best copies obtainable. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83

Payment Documents and Decisions

Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 16-4 Filed 09/15/17 Page 1 of 34 Payment Documents and Decisions Civil Action Number: 4:17-CV-00244 Claimant: Tami Lee Cheatham Account Number: 347-64-3768 Exhibits Exhibit No. of No. Description Page No. Pages 1A Disability Determination Transmittal, dated 07/30/2013 84 1 2A Disability Determination Explanation, dated 07/30/2013 85-98 14 3A Disability Determination Transmittal, dated 02/06/2014 99 1 4A Disability Determination Explanation, dated 02/06/2014 100-116 17 DATE: August 23, 2017 The documents and exhibits contained in this administrative record are the best copies obtainable. 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116

Jurisdictional Documents and Notices

Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 16-5 Filed 09/15/17 Page 1 of 66 Jurisdictional Documents and Notices Civil Action Number: 4:17-CV-00244 Claimant: Tami Lee Cheatham Account Number: 347-64-3768 Exhibits Exhibit No. of No. Description Page No. Pages 1B T2 Notice of Disapproved Claim, dated 07/30/2013 117-120 4 2B Request for Reconsideration, dated 09/10/2013 121 1 3B T2 Disability Reconsideration Notice, dated 02/06/2014 122-124 3 4B Representative Fee Agreement, dated 03/22/2014 125 1 5B Request for Hearing by ALJ, dated 03/25/2014 126 1 6B Appointment of Representative, dated 04/01/2014 127 1 7B Request for Hearing Acknowledgement Letter, dated 128-135 8 04/04/2014 8B Request for Hearing Acknowledgement Letter, dated 136-143 8 07/22/2014 9B Transfer Request for Hearing, dated 07/10/2015 144-150 7 10B Hearing Notice, dated 08/25/2015 151-170 20 11B Acknowledge Notice of Hearing, dated 08/28/2015 171 1 12B Resume of Vocational Expert 172-173 2 13B Representative Fee Agreement, dated 10/23/2015 174 1 14B Appointment of Representative, dated 10/23/2015 175 1 15B Notice Of Hearing Reminder, dated 10/30/2015 176-181 6 DATE: August 23, 2017 The documents and exhibits contained in this administrative record are the best copies obtainable. 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181

Non Disability Related Development

Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 16-6 Filed 09/15/17 Page 1 of 15 Non Disability Related Development Civil Action Number: 4:17-CV-00244 Claimant: Tami Lee Cheatham Account Number: 347-64-3768 Exhibits Exhibit No. of No. Description Page No. Pages 1D Application for Disability Insurance Benefits, dated 182-183 2 04/08/2013 2D Detailed Earnings Query, dated 08/11/2015 184-189 6 3D Summary Earnings Query, dated 08/11/2015 190 1 4D WHAT-Work History Assistant Tool, dated 08/11/2015 191 1 5D Misc Non-Disability Development, dated 08/11/2015 192 1 6D Misc Non-Disability Development, dated 08/11/2015 193-194 2 7D New Hire, Quarter Wage, Unemployment Query (NDNH), 195 1 dated 11/04/2015 DATE: August 23, 2017 The documents and exhibits contained in this administrative record are the best copies obtainable. 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195

Disability Related Development

Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 16-7 Filed 09/15/17 Page 1 of 142 Disability Related Development Civil Action Number: 4:17-CV-00244 Claimant: Tami Lee Cheatham Account Number: 347-64-3768 Exhibits Exhibit No. of No. Description Page No. Pages 1E Report of Contact, dated 04/08/2013 196 1 2E Disability Report-Field Office, dated 04/08/2013 197-198 2 3E Work History Report, dated 05/01/2013 199-209 11 4E Disability Report-Adult, dated 05/01/2013 210-225 16 5E 3rd Party Function Report-Adult, dated 06/21/2013, from 226-233 8 Charles Edward Cheatham 6E Work History Report, dated 06/21/2013, from claimant 234-241 8 7E Function Report-Adult, dated 06/21/2013, from claimant 242-250 9 8E Disability Report-Appeals, dated 09/15/2013 251-258 8 9E Disability Report-Field Office, dated 09/17/2013 259-260 2 10E Report of Contact, dated 09/19/2013 261 1 11E Function Report-Adult, dated 11/21/2013, from claimant 262-274 13 12E Headache Questionnaire, dated 07/25/2013 to 11/22/2013, 275-316 42 from claimant 13E Statement of Claimant or Other Person, dated 03/25/2014, 317 1 from claimant 14E Report of Contact, dated 03/29/2014 318 1 15E Disability Report-Field Office, dated 03/29/2014 319-320 2 16E Exhibit List-CD to Representative or Claimant Form # HA-L56 321-331 11 (03-200), dated 08/11/2015 17E Medications, dated 11/23/2015, from Tami Cheatham 332 1 18E Representative Brief, dated 02/03/2016 to 02/03/2016 333-336 4 DATE: August 23, 2017 The documents and exhibits contained in this administrative record are the best copies obtainable. 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336

Medical Records Part 1

Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 16-8 Filed 09/15/17 Page 1 of 101 Medical Records Civil Action Number: 4:17-CV-00244 Claimant: Tami Lee Cheatham Account Number: 347-64-3768 Exhibits Exhibit No. of No. Description Page No. Pages 1F Office Treatment Records, dated 03/17/2003 to 02/23/2004, 337-373 37 from Northwest Medical Center 2F Progress Notes, dated 12/23/2004 to 03/29/2005, from 374-412 39 Proactive Physical Therapy 3F Office Treatment Records, dated 01/12/2012, from Pain 413-414 2 Institute of Southern Arizona 4F Office Treatment Records, dated 01/05/2012 to 11/12/2012, 415-430 16 from Orang grove Family Practice-ACP 5F Emergency Department Records, dated 03/30/2013 to 431-436 6 03/31/2013, from Northwest Medical Center DATE: August 23, 2017 The documents and exhibits contained in this administrative record are the best copies obtainable. 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436

Medical Records Part 2

Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 16-9 Filed 09/15/17 Page 1 of 192 Medical Records Civil Action Number: 4:17-CV-00244 Claimant: Tami Lee Cheatham Account Number: 347-64-3768 Exhibits Exhibit No. of No. Description Page No. Pages 6F Office Treatment Records, dated 01/30/2003 to 04/09/2013, 437-627 191 from Arizona Community Physicians DATE: August 23, 2017 The documents and exhibits contained in this administrative record are the best copies obtainable. 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 626 627

Medical Records Part 3

Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 16-10 Filed 09/15/17 Page 1 of 236 Medical Records Civil Action Number: 4:17-CV-00244 Claimant: Tami Lee Cheatham Account Number: 347-64-3768 Exhibits Exhibit No. of No. Description Page No. Pages 6F Office Treatment Records, dated 01/30/2003 to 04/09/2013, 628-862 235 from Arizona Community Physicians DATE: August 23, 2017 The documents and exhibits contained in this administrative record are the best copies obtainable. 628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656 657 658 659 660 661 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681 682 683 684 685 686 687 688 689 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 708 709 710 711 712 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 740 741 742 743 744 745 746 747 748 749 750 751 752 753 754 755 756 757 758 759 760 761 762 763 764 765 766 767 768 769 770 771 772 773 774 775 776 777 778 779 780 781 782 783 784 785 786 787 788 789 790 791 792 793 794 795 796 797 798 799 800 801 802 803 804 805 806 807 808 809 810 811 812 813 814 815 816 817 818 819 820 821 822 823 824 825 826 827 828 829 830 831 832 833 834 835 836 837 838 839 840 841 842 843 844 845 846 847 848 849 850 851 852 853 854 855 856 857 858 859 860 861 862

Medical Records Part 4

Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 16-11 Filed 09/15/17 Page 1 of 136 Medical Records Civil Action Number: 4:17-CV-00244 Claimant: Tami Lee Cheatham Account Number: 347-64-3768 Exhibits Exhibit No. of No. Description Page No. Pages 6F Office Treatment Records, dated 01/30/2003 to 04/09/2013, 863-878 16 from Arizona Community Physicians 7F Office Treatment Records, dated 03/12/2013 to 06/03/2013, 879-901 23 from Marana Health Center 8F CE Psychiatry, dated 07/29/2013, from Hunter Yost M.D. 902-905 4 9F Office Treatment Records, dated 07/25/2013 to 08/09/2013, 906-914 9 from Jeffrey B. Loomer, M.D. 10F Office Treatment Records, dated 08/13/2013 to 11/08/2013, 915-937 23 from Marana Health Center 11F Misc Medical Records, dated 03/29/2014, from Yusuf Mathal, 938 1 MD 12F Office Treatment Records, dated 03/09/2015 to 06/17/2015, 939-975 37 from Vitamedica Institute 13F Medical Source Statement-Physical, dated 08/25/2015, from 976-978 3 Michale Lokale, DO 14F Hospital Records, dated 04/22/2014 to 08/06/2014, from Oro 979-997 19 Valley Hospital DATE: August 23, 2017 The documents and exhibits contained in this administrative record are the best copies obtainable. 863 864 865 866 867 868 869 870 871 872 873 874 875 876 877 878 879 880 881 882 883 884 885 886 887 888 889 890 891 892 893 894 895 896 897 898 899 900 901 902 903 904 905 906 907 908 909 910 911 912 913 914 915 916 917 918 919 920 921 922 923 924 925 926 927 928 929 930 931 932 933 934 935 936 937 938 939 940 941 942 943 944 945 946 947 948 949 950 951 952 953 954 955 956 957 958 959 960 961 962 963 964 965 966 967 968 969 970 971 972 973 974 975 976 977 978 979 980 981 982 983 984 985 986 987 988 989 990 991 992 993 994 995 996 997

Medical Records Part 5

Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 16-12 Filed 09/15/17 Page 1 of 64 Medical Records Civil Action Number: 4:17-CV-00244 Claimant: Tami Lee Cheatham Account Number: 347-64-3768 Exhibits Exhibit No. of No. Description Page No. Pages 15F Office Treatment Records, dated 07/18/2014 to 10/24/2014, 998-1027 30 from Samir Patel 16F Hospital Records, dated 03/27/2014 to 05/13/2015, from 1028-1060 33 Northwest Medical Center DATE: August 23, 2017 The documents and exhibits contained in this administrative record are the best copies obtainable. 998 999 1000 1001 1002 1003 1004 1005 1006 1007 1008 1009 1010 1011 1012 1013 1014 1015 1016 1017 1018 1019 1020 1021 1022 1023 1024 1025 1026 1027 1028 1029 1030 1031 1032 1033 1034 1035 1036 1037 1038 1039 1040 1041 1042 1043 1044 1045 1046 1047 1048 1049 1050 1051 1052 1053 1054 1055 1056 1057 1058 1059 1060

Medical Records Part 6

Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 16-13 Filed 09/15/17 Page 1 of 136 Medical Records Civil Action Number: 4:17-CV-00244 Claimant: Tami Lee Cheatham Account Number: 347-64-3768 Exhibits Exhibit No. of No. Description Page No. Pages 17F Office Treatment Records, dated 02/07/2014 to 04/03/2014, 1061-1071 11 from YUSUF MAHTAI 18F Office Treatment Records, dated 04/22/2014 to 12/16/2014, 1072-1087 16 from Dr. Rivero 19F Office Treatment Records, dated 02/09/2015 to 02/09/2015, 1088-1089 2 from Dr. Zeiller 20F Medical Source Statement-Physical, dated 10/19/2015, from 1090-1093 4 Michael Lokale, DO 21F Medical Source Statement-Mental, dated 10/19/2015, from 1094-1098 5 Michael Lokale, DO 22F Office Treatment Notes, dated 04/08/2014 to 10/20/2015, 1099-1195 97 from Michael Lokale, DO DATE: August 23, 2017 The documents and exhibits contained in this administrative record are the best copies obtainable. 1061 1062 1063 1064 1065 1066 1067 1068 1069 1070 1071 1072 1073 1074 1075 1076 1077 1078 1079 1080 1081 1082 1083 1084 1085 1086 1087 1088 1089 1090 1091 1092 1093 1094 1095 1096 1097 1098 1099 1100 1101 1102 1103 1104 1105 1106 1107 1108 1109 1110 1111 1112 1113 1114 1115 1116 1117 1118 1119 1120 1121 1122 1123 1124 1125 1126 1127 1128 1129 1130 1131 1132 1133 1134 1135 1136 1137 1138 1139 1140 1141 1142 1143 1144 1145 1146 1147 1148 1149 1150 1151 1152 1153 1154 1155 1156 1157 1158 1159 1160 1161 1162 1163 1164 1165 1166 1167 1168 1169 1170 1171 1172 1173 1174 1175 1176 1177 1178 1179 1180 1181 1182 1183 1184 1185 1186 1187 1188 1189 1190 1191 1192 1193 1194 1195

First MOTION for Extension of Time to file Plaintiff's Opening Brief by Tami Lee Cheatham.

Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 17 Filed 11/14/17 Page 1 of 2 1 Howard D. Olinsky 2 Olinsky Law Group 300 South State Street 3 Suite 420 4 Syracuse, NY 13202 N.Y. Bar No. 2044865 5 Telephone: (315) 701-5780 6 Facsimile: (315) 701-5781 holinsky@windisability.com 7 8 Attorney pro hac vice for Plaintiff 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 10 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 11 Tami Lee Cheatham, 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. No. 4:17-CV-00244-TUC-EJM 14 Nancy A. Berryhill, 15 Acting Commissioner of Social Security, 16 Defendant. __________________________________ 17 18 UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME (First Request) 19 20 Plaintiff, Tami Lee Cheatham, through counsel, Howard D. Olinsky, Esq., moves 21 for an extension of time of twenty days, up to and including December 4, 2017, to file her 22 Opening Brief. The Opening Brief is currently due Tuesday, November 14, 2017. 23 24 Counsel for Plaintiff requests this extension of time due to a combination of the 25 unexpected loss of two staff attorneys, size of the administrative transcript (at 1,212 26 pages), and simultaneous deadlines, which prevent proper supervision of the assigned law 27 28 1 Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 17 Filed 11/14/17 Page 2 of 2 1 clerk and completion of the brief by the current deadline. Counsel expects no further 2 requests of this kind. Counsel’s office contacted the Defendant’s counsel, who indicated 3 4 Defendant does not object to this extension. 5 Respectfully submitted this 14th day of November, 2017. 6 7 8 BY: s/Howard D. Olinsky Howard D. Olinsky, Esq. 9 Attorney for Plaintiff, Pro Hac Vice 10 11 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 12 Service of this document was made to Sarah Moum, counsel for defendant Acting 13 Commissioner, by the CM/ECF system that generated a notice of electronic filing to all 14 15 registered users of the CM/ECF system. Service was accomplished as of the date that is 16 stamped on the filed document by the CMECF system.. 17 18 19/s/Howard D. Olinsky Howard D. Olinsky, Esq. 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

Text of Proposed Order

Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 17-1 Filed 11/14/17 Page 1 of 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA Tami Lee Cheatham, Plaintiff, v. No. 4:17-CV-00244-TUC-EJM Nancy A. Berryhill Acting Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant. ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE OPENING BRIEF This unopposed Motion for first extension of time seeks an extension of time from November 14, 2017 to December 4, 2017 for Plaintiff to file her Opening Brief in this Social Security disability appeal. Counsel indicates that the motion is unopposed by defendant Acting Commissioner. Having considered the unopposed Motion and in consideration of the Counsel’s good cause shown, this Court concludes that the unopposed motion for first extension of time should be granted. It is hereby ORDERED that the unopposed Motion for first extension of time is GRANTED, and the extension of twenty days is allowed such that the Opening Brief shall be filed on or before December 4, 2017. DATED this _______ day of _____________, 20__ ___________ ___________________ Honorable Eric J. Markovich United States Magistrate Judge

ORDER GRANTING Plaintiff's unopposed [17] Motion for Extension of Time to File Opening Brief. Plaintiff shall file her opening brief on or before 12/4/17. Signed by Magistrate Judge Eric J Markovich on 11/14/17.

Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 18 Filed 11/15/17 Page 1 of 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 8 9 Tami Lee Cheatham, No. CV-17-00244-TUC-EJM 10 Plaintiff, ORDER 11 v. 12 Nancy A. Berryhill, Acting Commissioner of Social Security Administration, 13 Defendant. 14 15 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED granting Plaintiff’s unopposed motion for extension 16 of time to file opening brief. (Doc. 17). Plaintiff shall file her opening brief on or before 17 December 4, 2017. 18 Dated this 14th day of November, 2017. 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

OPENING BRIEF by Tami Lee Cheatham.

Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 19 Filed 12/04/17 Page 1 of 25 1 Howard D. Olinsky Olinsky Law Group 2 300 South State Street 3 Suite 420 Syracuse, NY 13202 4 N.Y. Bar No. 2044865 5 Telephone: (315) 701-5780 Facsimile: (315) 701-5781 6 holinsky@windisability.com 7 Attorney pro hac vice for Plaintiff 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 10 Tami Lee Cheatham, 11 Plaintiff, 12 v. No. 4:17-CV-00244-TUC-EJM 13 Nancy A. Berryhill, 14 Acting Commissioner of Social Security, OPENING BRIEF OF PLAINTIFF Defendant. 15 __________________________________ 16 I. STATEMENT OF ISSUES 17 1. The ALJ erred at Step Two by not finding Plaintiff’s headaches a severe 18 impairment. 19 2. The ALJ’s credibility determination is unsupported by substantial evidence. 20 3. The RFC determination is unsupported by substantial evidence. 21 II. STATEMENT OF CASE 22 On April 4, 2013, Tami Lee Cheatham ("Plaintiff") protectively filed an 23 application for a period of disability and disability insurance benefits, alleging disability 24 25 beginning January 22, 2013 due to: fibromyalgia, chronic neck/back pain, medication 26 27 1 28 Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 19 Filed 12/04/17 Page 2 of 25 1 side effects, cervical injury, back injury, poor memory and concentration, physical and 2 emotional fatigue, and insomnia. Administrative Transcript ("T") at 28. Plaintiff’s claim 3 was denied initially on July 30, 2013 (T 84) and again on reconsideration on February 6, 4 5 2014 (T 99). Thereafter, Plaintiff timely requested a hearing with an Administrative Law 6 Judge, and such hearing was held on November 13, 2015 with Administrative Law Judge 7 Barry Robinson (A"LJ"). T 51-83. The ALJ issued an unfavorable decision denying 8 Plaintiff’s claims on January 4, 2016. T 25-45. In the decision, the ALJ found that 9 Plaintiff meets the insureds status requirements of the Social Security Act through 10 11 December 31, 2017, and she has not engaged in substantial gainful activity since her 12 alleged onset date of January 22, 2013. T 30. He found she has the following severe 13 impairments: a pain disorder with psychological features variously characterized as 14 chronic pain syndrome, depression, and fibromyalgia, as well as degenerative disc 15 16 disease of the cervical spine. T 31. He found Plaintiff has the non-severe impairment of 17 essential tremor, seasonal allergies, and vitamin D deficiency. T 31. Next, the ALJ 18 found that Plaintiff does not have an impairment or combination of impairments that 19 meets or equals a listed impairment at 20 C.F.R. Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1. T 31. 20 The ALJ found Plaintiff has the residual functional capacity ("RFC") to perform: 21 22 Light work…except [Plaintiff] can frequently climb ramps and stairs, occasionally climb ladders and must never climb ropes or scaffolds. She can frequently balance, 23 stoop, kneel, crouch and crawl. She can occasionally reach overhead with both 24 upper extremities. She should avoid concentrated exposure to cold, heat, wetness, humidity and vibration as well as hazardous machinery and unprotected heights. 25 She can perform simple, unskilled work. 26 27 2 28 Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 19 Filed 12/04/17 Page 3 of 25 1 T 34. The ALJ found Plaintiff unable to perform any of her past relevant work. T 43. 2 3 Finally, the ALJ found that there are jobs that exist in significant numbers in the national 4 economy that Plaintiff can perform, including office clerk (Dictionary of Occupational 5 Titles ("DOT") 239.567-010), photo copy machine operator (DOT 207.685-014), and 6 grader sorter (DOT 529.687-186). T 45. Therefore, the ALJ found Plaintiff not disabled. 7 8 T 45. 9 The Appeals Council denied review of the ALJ’s decision on March 24, 2017, 10 thus making it the final decision of the Commissioner. T 1-3. Plaintiff then filed action in 11 this Court seeking review of the Commissioner’s final decision on May 26, 2017. Dkt. 12 No. 1. This Court has jurisdiction of this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). 13 14 III. STATEMENT OF FACTS 15 Born in July 1964, Plaintiff was 48 years old on her alleged onset date of January 16 22, 2013, and 51 years old on the date of the ALJ’s decision on January 4, 2016. T 44. 17 Plaintiff reported completing one year of college in 1997. T 212. She previously worked 18 19 as a loan documentation specialist, a bank teller, a loan officer, a team lead supervisor in 20 a call center, a call center information clerk, and a customer service supervisor in a 21 grocery store. T 43, 199. 22 A. Medical Evidence 23 24 In August 2003, Plaintiff underwent an anterior cervical discectomy with fusion 25 performed by Thomas Scully, MD, after a car accident the year prior, which caused 26 27 3 28 Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 19 Filed 12/04/17 Page 4 of 25 1 severe neck pain, and MRI imaging revealed disc herniation at C4-5. T 338, 342. The 2 surgery never fully resolved her neck pain, and she continued with other treatment, 3 including physical therapy, and neck injections which also did not help Plaintiff’s pain. T 4 5 380, 784. In February 2011, Plaintiff treated with Judith Brown, MD, for her continuing 6 neck pain and was unsure what more to do about her pain except continue taking 7 Vicodin. T 784. On April 21, 2011, Plaintiff treated with Dr. Brown and wondered if her 8 chronic debilitating pain could be fibromyalgia. T 779. Dr. Brown agreed that a 9 fibromyalgia diagnosis was probable based on Plaintiff’s clinical symptoms and started 10 11 Plaintiff on Cymbalta. T 779. Plaintiff followed up with Dr. Brown on June 29, 2011 12 after starting Cymbalta. T 775. She reported that it usually seems to work and she began 13 experiencing more good days, thought she is still suffering from pain symptoms 50% of 14 the time. T 775. Dr. Brown increased Plaintiff’s Cymbalta dose. T 775. However, on 15 16 July 19, 2011, Plaintiff called Dr. Brown’s office to report that the Cymbalta was not 17 working and she needed a different pain medication. T 772. On September 22, 2011, 18 Plaintiff tried cervical epidural steroid injections again with A. Reid Bullock, MD, to try 19 and treat her cervical spondylosis and cervical radiculopathy into the left arm. T 809. 20 Plaintiff treated with Dr. Brown again on January 5, 2012 for her chronic neck 21 22 pain and fibromyalgia. T 428-30. Plaintiff reported to Dr. Brown that the neck injections 23 have provided her no relief from pain. T 429. She reported that she has been taking 24 gabapentin with some relief, but still had debilitating pain. T 429. She also reported 25 26 27 4 28 Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 19 Filed 12/04/17 Page 5 of 25 1 taking Percocet which provided relief. T 429. Dr. Brown discontinued Plaintiff’s 2 Cymbalta and started her on Savella, Cyclobenzaprine (a muscle relaxer), and renewed 3 gabapentin and Percocet. T 430. 4 5 Plaintiff treated with Dr. Bullock and the Pain Institute of Southern Arizona on 6 January 12, 2012, for headaches and fibromyalgia. T 413. On examination, Plaintiff had 7 trouble remembering things and her husband occasionally had to clarify. T 414. Dr. 8 Bullock spent much of the appointment discussing fibromyalgia and advised Plaintiff to 9 try to exercise in a heated pool, try a gluten free diet, and increased her Savella 10 11 prescription to the maximum dose. T 414. Plaintiff followed up with Dr. Brown on 12 February 9, 2012, and reported that the increased dose of Savella had greatly improved 13 her fibromyalgia symptoms. T 425. She reported taking Flexeril without much 14 drowsiness and using Percocet rarely. T 425. Plaintiff saw Dr. Brown again on March 8, 15 16 2012, and reported that it was the best she had felt in a long time on her current 17 medication regimen. T 424. 18 On May 15, 2012 Plaintiff treated with Dr. Brown again, and reported that the 19 Savella medication was no longer working well. T 420. Plaintiff reported having more 20 pain and fatigue. T 420. She also reported alternative therapies, like acupuncture and 21 22 Chinese medicine, but that the Chinese medicine doctor had moved away and the other 23 therapies were cost prohibitive. T 420. Dr. Brown wanted Plaintiff to try Wellbutrin for 24 her symptoms, but declined to increase Plaintiff’s dose of narcotic medications, instead 25 26 27 5 28 Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 19 Filed 12/04/17 Page 6 of 25 1 refilling the current dose. T 421. Plaintiff followed up on June 12, 2012 and November 2 12, 2012, and reported that the Wellbutrin had helped her significantly, though she was 3 still feeling tired. T 416-419. 4 5 On February 13, 2013, Plaintiff called Dr. Brown’s office and reported that she 6 had lost her job, and could no longer afford to refill her gabapentin prescription. T 847. 7 She began treating with Yusuf Mathai, MD at Marana Health Center on March 12, 2013, 8 and reported having a lot of pain from fibromyalgia. T 897. Plaintiff reported there were 9 a number of times the previous week where she could not get out of bed due to pain. T 10 11 897. She also reported problems with insomnia, and that hydroxyzine was not helping 12 her with this. T 897. Plaintiff reported that she had nine out of ten pain all over her 13 body. T 900. Dr. Mathai prescribed Plaintiff Wellbutrin, Savella, gabapentin, and 14 methocarbamol for her fibromyalgia pain, and trazodone for her insomnia. T 901. 15 16 Plaintiff followed up with Dr. Mathai on March 26, 2013, reporting that her pain 17 had actually worsened since her last appointment and her insomnia had not improved 18 either. T 892. Plaintiff reported nine out of ten pain all over her body. T 894. On 19 examination, Plaintiff had tender points all along her shoulders bilaterally and along the 20 paraspinal muscles in the cervical, thoracic, and lumbar regions. T 895. Dr. Brown had 21 22 Plaintiff add duragesic patches to her medication regimen to try and treat her 23 fibromyalgia pain. T 892. He also increased her trazodone dose to try and treat 24 insomnia. T 895. 25 26 27 6 28 Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 19 Filed 12/04/17 Page 7 of 25 1 On March 31, 2013, Plaintiff went to the Emergency Room after beginning use of 2 the duragesic patch. T 431-32. Plaintiff reported that it made her nauseous and she was 3 still in pain. T 431-32. She was discharged with some Vicodin, and instructed to follow 4 5 up with her doctor. T 432. 6 Plaintiff followed up with Dr. Mathai on April 2, 2013 and reported that the 7 duragesic patch had made her very nauseous and she was unable to keep down food or 8 liquid. T 888. Plaintiff reported she was experiencing eight out of ten pain that day. T 9 890. Dr. Mathai instructed her to continue taking Vicodin because it appeared to be 10 11 helping with her pain. T 891. Plaintiff treated again with Dr. Mathai for refills of her 12 medications on April 29 and June 3, 2013. T 879-87. She reported that her medications 13 were helping somewhat, but still not optimal relief. T 879-87. Additionally, Dr. Mathai 14 prescribed her Effexor on April 29, 2013, because he stated depression tends to go 15 16 together with pain conditions like fibromyalgia. T 887. 17 Plaintiff treated with rheumatologist Jeffrey Loomer, MD, on July 25, 2013, who 18 she later reported she was unable to continue seeing due to cost. T 908, 931. In a 19 summary letter to Dr. Mathai regarding his evaluation of Plaintiff, Dr. Loomer wrote that 20 Plaintiff has fibromyalgia, experiences poor sleep pattern, has nonrestorative sleep 21 22 process, and easy fatigability. T 913. He wrote that on examination, Plaintiff was tender 23 to touch all over. T 913. She also was unable to laterally rotate her neck greater than 45 24 degrees bilaterally. T 914. Dr. Loomer opined that Plaintiff mainly was not getting 25 26 27 7 28 Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 19 Filed 12/04/17 Page 8 of 25 1 restorative sleep process. T 914. Dr. Loomer discontinued Plaintiff’s Effexor, Savella, 2 and Atarax prescriptions, and started her on Ambien for insomnia, as well as continued 3 her other medications, including gabapentin, Vicodin, and Wellbutrin. T 913-14. 4 5 Plaintiff followed up with Dr. Mathai on August 26, 2013 and reported that the 6 Ambien had helped somewhat though she was still having issues with sleep and her pain 7 control was not optimum. T 931. Dr. Mathai increased her Vicodin dose to treat 8 fibromyalgia, and left her other medications unchanged. T 934. 9 Plaintiff treated with Dr. Mathai on September 11. 2013, where she had yet 10 11 another medication change because the increased Vicodin dose was not relieving her 12 pain. T 927. Plaintiff reported ten out of ten pain all over and headache. T 929. Dr. 13 Mathai started her on a trial of MS Contin to see if this medication would relieve her 14 pain. T 929. 15 16 On November 8, 2013, Plaintiff reported to Dr. Mathai that the MS Contin was not 17 working as well as she had hoped and she wanted to go back to Vicodin. T 915. Dr. 18 Mathai wrote that Plaintiff’s fibromyalgia symptoms appeared to be worsening. T 915. 19 Dr. Mathai resumed Plaintiff’s Vicodin prescription. T 917. 20 Plaintiff treated at Marana Health Center with Matthew McConnell, FNP, for a 21 22 follow up on her fibromyalgia and headaches. T 919. Plaintiff stated she was very 23 frustrated with trying to get her pain levels under control over the years. T 919. Plaintiff 24 25 26 27 8 28 Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 19 Filed 12/04/17 Page 9 of 25 1 reported nine out of ten pain all over her body. T 920. Nurse Practioner McConnell 2 made no changes to Plaintiff’s prescription medications. T 921. 3 Plaintiff treated with Dr. Mathai again on February 7, 2014 for issues with 4 5 worsening depression and poor pain control. T 1068. Plaintiff reported her pain at nine 6 out of ten. T 1070. Dr. Mathai started Plaintiff on Celexa to try and treat her depression 7 and continued the Wellbutrin. T 1070. He continued her methocarbamol and Vicodin to 8 treat her pain from fibromyalgia. T 1070. Dr. Mathai stated that Lyrica would be a good 9 alternative to gabapentin, however Plaintiff could not afford it at the moment. T 1071. 10 11 Dr. Mathai changed her medications for pain management again on April 3, 2014, 12 when he started Plaintiff on Lyrica instead of gabapentin, and Percocet instead of Vicodin 13 to see if this better controlled her pain. T 1062-65. 14 Plaintiff underwent a cervical spine MRI on April 8, 2014, which found moderate 15 16 left and mild right foraminal narrowing at C5-6. T 997. 17 Plaintiff began treating with Michael Lokale, DO, on April 8, 2014 at Northwest 18 Allied Physicians for her fibromyalgia and depression. T 1193. On examination, 19 Plaintiff had tight paraspinal muscles. T 1195. Dr. Lokale gave Plaintiff a prescription 20 for Lyrica. T 1195. 21 22 Plaintiff had a lumbar MRI on April 22, 2014, which revealed a central annular 23 tear with diffuse disc bulging, greater on the left, and mild facet degenerative changes. T 24 996. Plaintiff followed up with Dr. Lokale on April 22, 2014. T 1180-84. Plaintiff 25 26 27 9 28 Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 19 Filed 12/04/17 Page 10 of 25 1 reported that her back pain was worsening. T 1180. She Dr. Lokale stated that the 2 etiology was degenerative disc disease and spinal stenosis. T 1180. Plaintiff reported her 3 depression was stable since her last visit. T 1180. Plaintiff continued to treat with Dr. 4 5 Lokale until at least October 20, 2015, with no real improvement of her pain or 6 depression. T 1101-22, 1128-60, 1167-1174, 1177-1179. 7 Plaintiff underwent a lumbar epidural steroid injection on July 24, 2014 with 8 Samir Patel, DO. T 990. She reported to Dr. Lokale on August 18, 2014, that this had 9 not helped her pain. T 1167. 10 11 Plaintiff underwent an MRI of her head on August 22, 2014 due to her chronic 12 tension-type headaches and cervical spine stenosis. T 1161. The MRI revealed some 13 white matter hyperintense spots on her brain, which Kim Burroughs, MD, stated can be 14 seen with headache syndrome and/or small vessel ischemic change. T 1161. Dr. 15 16 Burroughs also found moderate-severe right and mild-moderate left foraminal stenosis at 17 C4-6 in Plaintiff’s cervical spine. T 1164. 18 Plaintiff received a lumbar facet joint injection performed by Dr. Patel on October 19 1, 2014, which she also reported to Dr. Lokale and Dr. Patel had not worked in relieving 20 her pain. T 998-1002, 1157. 21 22 Plaintiff began treating with Mataja de Leonni Stanonik, MD, for her headaches 23 on November 18, 2014. T 1076-77. Plaintiff reported that she had been getting 24 progressive headaches for the last three years. T 1076. She reported that she had a 25 26 27 10 28 Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 19 Filed 12/04/17 Page 11 of 25 1 headache almost every day and has severe headaches four to five times per week. T 2 1076. Plaintiff reported her headaches can sometime last up to twelve hours, though 3 usually last six hours. T 1076. Plaintiff had a severe migraine at her appointment. T 4 5 1076. Plaintiff continued to treat with Dr. Stanonik until at least June 17, 2015, and 6 received two Botox injections to try and alleviate her severe headaches, which did not 7 completely help. T 940-75. 8 On February 9, 2015, Plaintiff underwent an evaluation with Steven Zeiller, MD, 9 to evaluate the need for surgical intervention. T 1089. Dr. Zeiller noted that she had 10 11 limited cervical flexion, extension, and rotation. T 1089. On evaluation of the strength 12 in her upper and lower extremities, he found she had symmetric strength, though was not 13 giving best volitional effort. T 1089. Plaintiff was extremely sensitive to palpation of the 14 paraspinal musculature on examination. T 1089. Dr. Zeiller diagnosed her with 15 16 fibromyalgia and cervical degenerative disc disease, and did not recommend surgery at 17 this point. T 1089. 18 B. Opinion Evidence 19 On July 18, 2013, L.A. Woodard, DO, a non-examining state agency medical 20 21 consultant opined that Plaintiff could perform light work, except can only frequently 22 climb ramps/stairs, balance, stoop, kneel, crouch, and crawl, and occasionally climb 23 ladders/ropes/scaffolds. T 92-93. Dr. Woodard opined that Plaintiff should avoid even 24 moderate exposure to workplace hazards due to medication side effects. T 93. 25 26 27 11 28 Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 19 Filed 12/04/17 Page 12 of 25 1 Plaintiff underwent a psychological consultative examination by Hunter Yost, MD 2 on July 29, 2013. T 902-904. Her mental status examination was normal. T 903. Dr. 3 Yost diagnosed her with pain disorder with psychological features due to chronic 4 5 musculoskeletal issues and chronic pain syndrome. T 903. Dr. Yost opined that Plaintiff 6 is managing her chronic pain as best as she can, and she had no cognitive deficits. T 903. 7 These findings were confirmed on reconsideration by Charles Combs, MD. T 110. 8 On July 30, 2013, Randall Garland, Ph.D., a non-examining state agency 9 psychological consultant, opined that Plaintiff had mild limitations in activities of daily 10 11 living and social functioning, and moderate limitations in concentration persistence or 12 pace. T 90. Specifically, Dr. Garland opined that Plaintiff had moderate limitations in 13 her ability to understand and remember detailed instructions, her ability to maintain 14 attention and concentration for extended periods, and her ability to complete a normal 15 16 workday/workweek without interruptions from psychologically based symptoms and to 17 perform at a consistent pace without an unreasonable number and length of rest periods. 18 T 94. Dr. Garland opined that Plaintiff has social interaction limitations, though did not 19 specify particular ones. T 95. He also opined Plaintiff has adaptation limitations, but 20 again did not specify anything in particular. T 95. These findings were confirmed on 21 22 reconsideration by Alan Goldberg, Psy.D. T 113. 23 On August 25, 2015, Dr. Lokale, Plaintiff’s treating physician, completed at 24 residual functional capacity assessment regarding limitations from Plaintiff’s chronic 25 26 27 12 28 Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 19 Filed 12/04/17 Page 13 of 25 1 pain syndrome and fibromyalgia. T 977-78. Dr. Lokale opined that Plaintiff’s symptoms 2 were severe enough to interfere with her attention and concentration required to perform 3 simple work-related tasks constantly. T 977. He stated that her pain medication can 4 5 cause drowsiness. T 977. He opined that Plaintiff would need to recline or lie down 6 during the workday in excess of normal breaks allowed. T 977. He further opined she 7 could not sit/walk/stand for any amount of time during a workday. T 977. Dr. Lokale 8 opined that Plaintiff can never lift anything greater than ten pounds, and she has 9 limitations doing repetitive reaching, handling, and fingering. T 977. Finally, Dr. Lokale 10 11 opined that Plaintiff was likely to miss work more than four times a month due to her 12 impairments or treatments. T 978. 13 Dr. Lokale gave another RFC assessment on October 19, 2015, in which he opined 14 that Plaintiff’s chronic pain, fatigue, depression, and lack of concentration were severe 15 16 enough to frequently interfere with her attention and concentration during the workday. 17 T 1091. He opined that she would be able to sit for fifteen minutes at a time, for a total 18 of three hours a day, and stand/walk for fifteen minutes at a time for one hour total a day. 19 T 1091. He also opined that she would need a job that permitted shifting positions at will 20 and she would need to take unscheduled breaks depending on flare ups of her conditions. 21 22 T 1091. Dr. Lokale opined that Plaintiff could not lift any weight and had significant 23 limitations in her ability to reach, handle, and finger objects. T 1092. Finally, he opined 24 she was likely to miss work more than four times per month. T 1097. 25 26 27 13 28 Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 19 Filed 12/04/17 Page 14 of 25 1 Dr. Lokale also completed a mental RFC assessment on October 19, 2015, 2 regarding Plaintiff’s major depression recalcitrant to multiple antidepressant medications. 3 T 1095. He opined she had marked to extreme limitations in her understanding and 4 5 memory, sustained concentration, social interaction, and adaptation. T 1095-97. 6 C. Hearing Testimony 7 Plaintiff testified to the following: She was fired from her last job at the bank, after 8 working there for ten years, because her job performance had decreased and she was 9 10 forgetting procedures. T 59. Plaintiff dresses herself, but her husband bathes her. T 69. 11 Her children do the household chores. T 68. Plaintiff had to stop seeing Dr. Stanonik for 12 her headaches because her insurance was not accepted there, though she still takes 13 Topiramate for her headaches. T 72. The medication does not make her headaches go 14 15 away. T 72. She was completely unaware that Dr. Zeiller thought she was not trying 16 hard enough in her examination because he told her he could tell she was in pain. T 78. 17 The Vocational Expert ("VE") testified to the following: if an individual were off 18 task about 20% of the workday, it would preclude work. T 82. She further testified that 19 someone who could sit for up to six hours per day, but needed a sit/stand option every 20 21 twenty minutes, could stand/walk less than one hour, and due to pain and side effects of 22 medications would be limited to simple, unskilled work, would be precluded from any 23 competitive work. T 82. 24 IV. ARGUMENT 25 26 27 14 28 Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 19 Filed 12/04/17 Page 15 of 25 1 Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), this Court may review the record to determine 2 whether the Commissioner applied the proper legal standards and whether substantial 3 evidence supports the final agency decision to deny Plaintiff benefits. Substantial 4 5 evidence means more than a scintilla, "[i]t means such relevant evidence as a reasonable 6 mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion." Richardson v. Perales, 402 U.S. 7 389, 400 (1971) (quoting Consolidated Edison Co. v. NLRB, 305 U.S. 229 (1938)). An 8 individual is considered disabled for purposes of disability benefits if she is unable to 9 "engage in any substantial gainful activity by reason of any medically determinable 10 11 physical or mental impairment which can be expected to result in death or which has 12 lasted or can be expected to last for a continuous period of not less than 12 months." 42 13 U.S.C. § 423(d)(1)(A). 14 1. The ALJ erred at Step Two by not finding Plaintiff’s headaches a severe 15 impairment. 16 "An impairment or combination of impairments is'severe’ within the meaning of 17 18 the regulations if it significantly limits an individual’s ability to perform basic work 19 activities." See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c), 404.1521; Social Security Rulings ("SSRs") 20 85-28, 96-3p, 96-4p. "An impairment or combination of impairments may be found'not 21 severe only if the evidence establishes a slight abnormality that has no more than a 22 23 minimal effect on an individual's ability to work.’" Webb v. Barnhart, 433 F.3d 683, 24 686-87 (9th Cir. 2005) (quoting Smolen v. Chater, 80 F.3d 1273, 1290 (9th Cir. 1996) 25 (citing Yuckert v. Bowen, 841 F.2d 303, 306 (9th Cir. 1988)). Thereby, Step 2 involves a 26 27 15 28 Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 19 Filed 12/04/17 Page 16 of 25 1 "de minimis screening device [used] to dispose of groundless claims." Id. The "ALJ may 2 find that a claimant lacks a medically severe impairment or combination of impairments 3 only when his conclusion is'clearly established by medical evidence.’" Galligan v. 4 5 Astrue, 656 F. Supp.2d 1067, 1095 (D. Ariz. 2009) (citing Webb, 433 F.3d at 687). Here, 6 despite questioning Plaintiff about her headaches during the hearing and despite the 7 extensive medical evidence, the ALJ fails to find Plaintiff’s headaches a severe 8 impairment. T 31. 9 Plaintiff began treating for her headaches as early as 2012, when she went to the 10 11 Pain Institute of Southern Arizona and saw Dr. Bullock there. T 413. She was still 12 reporting headaches in 2013 when she was treating with Dr. Mathai. T 919, 929. She 13 had an MRI done of her brain because of her chronic tension-type headaches on August 14 22, 2014, which found white matter hyperintensities noted to be consistent with headache 15 16 syndrome. T 1161. When Plaintiff first began seeing Dr. Stanonik for her headaches, 17 she reported experiencing worsening headaches for the last three years, which is clearly 18 supported by the evidence. T 1076. She even underwent Botox injections to treat her 19 severe headaches.1 T 940, 967. This provided a decrease in the intensity of her 20 headaches, but not full relief and Plaintiff continued to have to take Oxycodone. T 943-21 22 45. Plaintiff reports to Dr. Stanonik that her headaches can last even up to twelve hours 23 24 1 Botox is an FDA approved treatment for chronic migraines. Botox for Migraine, American Migraine Foundation (June 14, 2017), https://americanmigrainefoundation.org/understanding-25 migraine/botox-for-migraine/26 27 16 28 Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 19 Filed 12/04/17 Page 17 of 25 1 sometimes, cause cloudiness of the mind, nausea, photophobia, and phonophobia. T 943-2 45. 3 It is unclear why the judge discussed Plaintiff’s headaches further in his decision, 4 5 yet failed to find them a severe impairment. T 31, 35, 38. These clearly have more than 6 a minimal effect on Plaintiff’s ability to work and clearly meet the de minimis screening 7 standard at Step Two. See Webb, 433 F.3d at 686-87. The failure to find Plaintiff’s 8 headaches a severe impairment subsequently affected the RFC analysis, because the RFC 9 does not account for off-task behavior or days of work missed due to symptoms. T 34. 10 11 Someone who is having severe headaches four to five times per week that sometimes last 12 up to twelve hours is clearly going to experience a significant limitation in her ability to 13 perform basic work activities." See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c), 404.1521; SSRs 85-28, 96-14 3p, 96-4p. The ALJ’s Step Two determination is unsupported by substantial evidence 15 16 because it does not account for all of Plaintiff’s severe impairments. T 31. Therefore, 17 this case requires remand for a proper consideration of the evidence which supports 18 further limitations. 19 2. The ALJ’s credibility determination is unsupported by substantial evidence. 20 21 When there is a medically determinable impairment that can reasonably be 22 expected to produce the symptoms complained of, it is necessary for the ALJ to 23 determine how those symptoms limit the ability to work. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c). In 24 making that determination, the ALJ cannot reject statements concerning symptoms solely 25 26 27 17 28 Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 19 Filed 12/04/17 Page 18 of 25 1 because there is no objective medical evidence. Id. The ALJ must consider conflicts 2 between statements and all other evidence in the record. Id. The reasons for the 3 credibility finding must be grounded in evidence. SSR 96-7p. 4 5 The ALJ purports to discredit Plaintiff’s statements regarding her symptoms partly 6 because "[a]n examining rheumatologist also believed she was not providing a full effort 7 upon examination and that her main problem was with lack of restorative sleep. He 8 discontinued several medications meant to treat her fibromyalgia and instead prescribed 9 medication to treat constipation and insomnia." T 39. 10 11 First, the ALJ does not provide a citation to the record that says Dr. Loomer, the 12 only examining rheumatologist on record, ever said Plaintiff was not giving full effort 13 during his examination. This would be difficult for the ALJ to do because Dr. Loomer 14 never says this. The ALJ appears to be mixing up the evidence, because it was Dr. 15 16 Zeiller, an orthopedist who was evaluating Plaintiff for potential spinal surgery, who 17 opined she was not giving her best volitional effort on examination of upper and lower 18 extremity strength. T 1089. The ALJ appears to misunderstand the nature of 19 fibromyalgia, because non-restorative sleep is one of the diagnostic criteria of 20 fibromyalgia accepted by the Social Security Administration. SSR 12-2p, 2012 WL 21 22 3104869, at *3 (2010 ACR Preliminary Diagnostic Criteria includes waking unrefreshed 23 (non-restorative sleep) as one of the fibromyalgia symptoms, signs, or co-occurring 24 conditions). The ALJ further appears to not closely examine the record when he attempts 25 26 27 18 28 Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 19 Filed 12/04/17 Page 19 of 25 1 to discredit Plaintiff, saying Dr. Loomer "discontinued several medications meant to treat 2 her fibromyalgia[.]" T 39. The record clearly shows that Dr. Loomer stopped Plaintiff’s 3 Effexor because it was giving her headaches. T 913. He stopped her Savella because it 4 5 was it was too expensive. T 914. He stopped her Atarax (or hydroxyzine) because he 6 prescribed her Ambien instead for insomnia. T 914. The ALJ conveniently does not 7 mention that Dr. Loomer continued Plaintiff on all her other medications, which included 8 gabapentin, Vicodin, and Wellbutrin. T 913-14. 9 Additionally, the ALJ purports to discredit Plaintiff’s symptoms of fibromyalgia 10 11 because [t]here is no documentation of sensorimotor dysfunction or muscle atrophy." T 12 39. An ALJ "err[s] by'effectively requiring objective evidence for a disease that eludes 13 such measurement." Benecke v. Barnhart, 379 F.3d 587, 594 (9th Cir. 2004). The ALJ 14 has demonstrated a fundamental misunderstanding of fibromyalgia in his evaluation of 15 16 Plaintiff’s credibility and in his decision to find Plaintiff’s allegations not credible. See 17 Revels v. Berryhill, 847 F.3d 648, 662 (9th Cir. 2017). The ALJ also relies heavily on 18 Plaintiff’s reported activities of daily living to discredit her statements, but the "court has 19 repeatedly asserted that the mere fact that a plaintiff has carried on certain daily 20 activities…does not in any way detract from her credibility as to her overall disability. 21 22 One does not need to be'utterly incapacitated’ in order to be disabled." Benecke, 379 23 F.3d at 594. 24 25 26 27 19 28 Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 19 Filed 12/04/17 Page 20 of 25 1 The reasons the ALJ finds to find Plaintiff are not credible are absolutely not 2 grounded in evidence. See SSR 96-7p. In fact, the evidence he cites to support his 3 credibility determination does not even exist. The ALJ has made a grave error in his 4 5 credibility determination and this case requires remand for a proper evaluation of 6 Plaintiff’s credibility. 7 3. The RFC determination is unsupported by substantial evidence. 8 The "Residual functional capacity is the most someone can do despite their mental 9 10 and physical limitations." Berry v. Astrue, 622 F.3d 1228, 1233 (9th Cir. 2010); 20 11 C.F.R. § 404.1545(a)(1). The residual functional capacity is an "assessment of an 12 individual's ability to do sustained work-related physical and mental activities in a work 13 setting on a regular and continuing basis." Brown v. Astrue, 405 Fed. App’x 230, 233 14 15 (9th Cir. 2010) (citing 20 C.F.R. § 416.945; Reddick v. Chater, 157 F.3d 715, 724 (9th 16 Cir. 1998)). 17 a. The RFC fails to account for Plaintiff’s moderate limitations in 18 concentration, persistence, and pace. 19 Courts in the Ninth Circuit have repeatedly found that limiting a claimant to 20 simple, routine, and repetitive work in the RFC does not account for moderate limitations 21 in concentration, persistence, or pace ("CPP") established by the medical evidence. E.g., 22 23 Melton v. Comm’r Soc. Sec., 442 Fed. App’x 339, 341 (9th Cir. 2011) (ALJ erred in her 24 assessment of plaintiff's RFC where the assessment included plaintiff's restriction to 25 26 27 20 28 Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 19 Filed 12/04/17 Page 21 of 25 1 simple, repetitive tasks, but did not include plaintiff's limitations in maintaining CPP); 2 Brink v. Comm’r Soc. Sec., 343 Fed. App’x 211, 212 (9th Cir. 2009); Tucker v. Colvin, 3 No. CV 14-08146 AG (RAO), 2015 WL 7737300 at *1-2 (C.D. Cal., Nov. 30, 2015) 4 5 (finding the reasoning of Brink persuasive and distinguishing from Stubbs-Danielson 6 where the ALJ expressly found a moderate limitation with CPP but the RFC only 7 included a limitation to perform no more than simple, repetitive tasks); Bentancourt v. 8 Astrue, No. EDCV 10-0196 CW, 2010 WL 4916604 at *3 (C.D. Cal., Nov. 27, 2010) 9 (distinguishing Stubbs-Danielson because the medical evidence in the case did establish 10 11 limitations in CPP); Cavanaugh v. Colvin, No. CV 13-1222-TUC-JAS, 2014 WL 12 7339072 at *6 (D. Ariz., Dec. 23, 2014). Stubbs-Danielson v. Astrue, does not apply in 13 the present matter, because here, as in Brink and all other cases cited above, the ALJ 14 specifically found Plaintiff has moderate limitations in CPP (T 30), a finding which is 15 16 supported by the medical evidence. See Stubbs-Danielson v. Astrue, 539 F.3d 1169, 1173 17 (9th Cir. 2008) (ALJ did not adopt mental limitations opined by physicians which were 18 not supported by the medical evidence). 19 Cases in which the court finds that the ALJ did adequately account for moderate 20 deficiencies in CPP are distinguished from the present case. E.g., Strawn v. Berryhill, 21 22 No. 2:16-cv-3249, 2017 WL 3393403 at *8 (D. Ariz., Aug. 8, 2017) (RFC included a 23 limitation that claimant needed "some variability in…work pace" in addition to 24 claimant’s preclusion from fast-paced production rate work); Marchand v. Berryhill, No. 25 26 27 21 28 Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 19 Filed 12/04/17 Page 22 of 25 1 2:16-cv-00156, 2017 WL 579904 at *5 (E.D. Wash., Feb. 13, 2017) (ALJ found claimant 2 to only have mild difficulties with CPP); Nelson v. Colvin, No. 16-cv-00594-MEJ, 2016 3 WL 5942229 at *6 (N.D. Cal., Oct. 13, 2016) (ALJ found moderate limitations in CPP 4 5 and limited claimant to "low stress work, defined as no work at a production rate pace[]" 6 but the opinion evidence "did not indicate [claimant’s] mild to moderate limitations 7 would result in excessive absences beyond a number customarily tolerated in the 8 workplace, nor that [claimant] would be unable to sustain concentration and attention 9 required to perform day to day work activity). 10 11 The ALJ specifically found that Plaintiff has moderate limitations in CPP because 12 Plaintiff "alleged at hearing that she has poor concentration and memory…The evidence 13 of record also indicates that she has been prescribed narcotic pain medications." T 33. 14 The RFC does not even adequately account for the explicit limitations in CPP the judge 15 16 finds Plaintiff to have. T 33. Additionally, the failure to find Plaintiff’s headaches a 17 severe impairment, as argued above, pervades the analysis here as well, because the ALJ 18 fails to provide a limitation for off-task behavior due to interference of Plaintiff’s 19 symptoms. T 34. This is error, because the VE testified that 20% off-task behavior 20 would preclude work. T 82. 21 22 The failure to account for these limitations renders the RFC determination 23 unsupported by substantial evidence, because it does not account for Plaintiff’s moderate 24 limitations in CPP. 25 26 27 22 28 Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 19 Filed 12/04/17 Page 23 of 25 1 b. The ALJ improperly gives little weight to Dr. Lokale’s opinion regarding Plaintiff’s physical limitations. 2 3 Examining sources are entitled to more weight than non-examining sources. 20 4 C.F.R. § 404.1527(c)(1). More weight should be given to opinions that are more 5 consistent with the record as a whole. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1527(c)(4). "If a treating or 6 examining doctor’s opinion is contradicted by another doctor’s opinion, an ALJ may only 7 8 reject it by providing specific and legitimate reasons that are supported by substantial 9 evidence." Garrison v. Colvin, 759 F.3d 995, 1012 (9th Cir. 2014) (citing Ryan v. 10 Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 528 F.3d 1194, 1198 (9th Cir. 2008)). "The ALJ can meet this 11 burden by setting out a detailed and thorough summary of the facts and conflicting 12 clinical evidence, stating his interpretation thereof, and making findings." Vieyra v. 13 14 Barnhart, 70 F. App’x 973, 975 (9th Cir. 2003) (citing Magallanes v. Bowen, 881 F.2d 15 747, 751 (9th Cir. 1989)). 16 The ALJ rejects Dr. Lokale’s opinion because it there are "inconsistencies with 17 one another [and] they far exceed the credible medical evidence of record, including the 18 19 information documented in Dr. Lokale’s own treatment notes." However, Plaintiff has 20 had multiple medical imaging done of her cervical and lumbar spine, which has revealed 21 mild to severe foraminal narrowing at C5-6 (T 1164), and a central annular tear with 22 diffuse disc bulging at the L4-5 level (T 996). She tries lumbar epidural steroid 23 24 injections, but reports to Dr. Lokale and Dr. Patel that they do not work. T 998-1001, 25 1169, 1157. She appears anxious and severely distressed due to pain in an examination 26 27 23 28 Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 19 Filed 12/04/17 Page 24 of 25 1 in August 2014 with Dr. Patel. T 1015. She consistently has tight paraspinal muscles on 2 examination by Dr. Lokale with tenderness to palpation of her back. T 1101, 1104, 1108, 3 1112, 1116, 1129, 1133, 1136, 1140, 1144, 1149, 1152, 1154, 1158, 1168, 1178, 1194. 4 5 At her most recent appointment with Dr. Lokale for treatment of her pain, he noted that 6 she is not doing well with her goals and continued to prescribe Plaintiff her pain 7 medication. T 1103. 8 Dr. Lokale’s opinion, as Plaintiff’s treating physician, deserved at least significant 9 weight. If the ALJ had properly evaluated Dr. Lokale’s opinion, at least regarding 10 11 Plaintiff’s ability to lift, reach, or stand/walk, he would have found Plaintiff incapable of 12 performing light work. It is particularly harmful that the ALJ did not afford this opinion 13 proper weight because according to Medical Vocational Guideline Rule 201.14, if 14 Plaintiff had been properly limited to sedentary work at most, she would be found 15 16 disabled. 20 C.F.R. Chapter III, Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 2, Rule 201.14; See T 44. 17 Therefore, the RFC is unsupported by substantial evidence, and this case requires remand 18 for proper consideration of the opinion evidence. 19 V. RELIEF REQUESTED 20 For the foregoing reasons, it is respectfully requested that the final agency 21 22 decision be vacated and that this matter be remanded for further administrative 23 proceedings including, but not limited to, a de novo hearing and a new decision. 24 Dated: December 4, 2017 Respectfully submitted, 25 26 27 24 28 Case 4:17-cv-00244-EJM Document 19 Filed 12/04/17 Page 25 of 25 1/s/Howard D. Olinsky Howard D. Olinsky, Esq. 2 Admitted Pro Hac Vice 3 Olinsky Law Group 300 South State Street, Suite 420 4 Syracuse, New York 13202 Phone: (315) 701-5780 5 Fax: (315) 701-5781 6 Email: holinsky@windisability.com 7 8 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 9 Service of this document was made to Sarah Moum, counsel for defendant Acting 10 Commissioner, by the CM/ECF system that generated a notice of electronic filing to all 11 registered users of the CM/ECF system. Service was accomplished as of the date that is 12 stamped on the filed document by the CMECF system.. 13 14 15/s/Howard D. Olinsky Howard D. Olinsky, Esq. 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 25 28

First MOTION for Extension of Time to File Responsive Brief, Unopposed by Commissioner of Social Security Administration.

1 Elizabeth A. Strange First Assistant United States Attorney 2 District of Arizona 3 Sarah Moum 4 Special Assistant United States Attorney 5 Office of the General Counsel Social Security Administration 6 701 Fifth Avenue, Suite 2900 M/S 221A 7 Seattle, WA 98104-7075 State Bar No. WA42086 8 Fax: (206) 615-2531 sarah.moum@ssa.gov 9 Telephone: (206) 615-2936 10 Of Attorneys for the Defendant 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 12 DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 13 Tami Lee Cheatham, 14 No. CV-17-00244-TUC-EJM 15 Plaintiff, 16 DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR vs. EXTENSION OF TIME 17 Nancy A. Berryhill, 18 (First Request) Acting Commissioner of Social Security, 19 Defendant. 20 21 Upon the records and files herein and the following statement, Defendant moves 22 for an order allowing additional time, through January 31, 2018, in which to file a 23 response to Plaintiff's opening brief in the above-entitled action, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. 24 25 P. 6(b)(1) and LRCiv 7.3. As stated below, Plaintiff's counsel has no objection to this 26 request. 27 In support of this Motion, the undersigned Special Assistant United States 28 1 Attorney states: 2 1. This is Defendant's first request for an extension in this action and there is good 3 cause to grant this request. 4 5 2. I am seeking authority to settle this case. 6 3. For this reason, I am requesting a 28-day extension to file the Commissioner's 7 response to Plaintiff's opening brief. 8 4. I conferred with opposing counsel, Howard Olinsky, who has no objection to this 9 10 motion. 11 DATED this 3rd day of January 2018. 12 Respectfully submitted, 13 14 ELIZABETH A. STRANGE 15 First Assistant United States Attorney 16 District of Arizona 17 s/ Sarah Moum 18 SARAH MOUM Special Assistant United States Attorney 19 Of Counsel for the Defendant: 20 21 MATHEW W. PILE Acting Regional Chief Counsel, Social Security Administration 22 Office of the General Counsel, Region X 23 701 Fifth Avenue, Suite 2900 M/S 221A Seattle, WA 98104-7075 24 25 26 27 28 2 1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 2 I hereby certify that the foregoing Defendant's Motion for Extension of 3 Time was filed with the Clerk of the Court on January 3, 2018, using the CM/ECF 4 5 system, which will send notification of such filing to the following: Howard D. 6 Olinsky. 7 8 s/ Sarah Moum 9 SARAH MOUM Special Assistant U.S. Attorney 10 Office of the General Counsel 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3

Text of Proposed Order

1 2 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 3 4 Tami Lee Cheatham, No. CV-17-00244-TUC-EJM 5 Plaintiff, 6 ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR vs. 7 EXTENSION OF TIME 8 Nancy A. Berryhill, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, 9 10 Defendant. 11 Before the Court is Defendant's Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to file 12 her response to Plaintiff's opening brief (ECF No. 20). Good cause appearing, 13 14 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant's motion (ECF No. 20) is GRANTED. 15 Defendant's response to Plaintiff's opening brief is due on January 31, 2018. 16 Dated this ____ of January, 2018. 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

ORDER GRANTING defendant's [20] Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to file her response to Plaintiff's opening brief. Defendant's response to Plaintiff's opening brief is due on 1/31/18. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Eric J Markovich on 1/3/18.

1 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 8 9 Tami Lee Cheatham, No. CV-17-00244-TUC-EJM 10 Plaintiff, ORDER 11 v. 12 Commissioner of Social Security Administration, 13 Defendant. 14 15 16 Before the Court is Defendant's Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to file 17 her response to Plaintiff's opening brief (Doc. 20). Good cause appearing, 18 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant's motion (Doc. 20) is GRANTED. 19 Defendant's response to Plaintiff's opening brief is due on January 31, 2018. 20 Dated this 3rd day of January, 2018. 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

MOTION to Remand to Social Security Administration Stipulated by Commissioner of Social Security Administration.

1 Elizabeth A. Strange First Assistant United States Attorney 2 District of Arizona 3 Sarah Moum 4 Special Assistant United States Attorney 5 Office of the General Counsel Social Security Administration 6 701 Fifth Avenue, Suite 2900 M/S 221A 7 Seattle, WA 98104-7075 State Bar No. WA42086 8 Fax: (206) 615-2531 sarah.moum@ssa.gov 9 Telephone: (206) 615-2936 10 Of Attorneys for the Defendant 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 12 DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 13 Tami Lee Cheatham, 14 No. CV-17-244-TUC-EJM 15 Plaintiff, 16 STIPULATED MOTION FOR vs. REMAND 17 Nancy A. Berryhill, 18 Acting Commissioner of Social Security, 19 Defendant. 20 21 The parties, acting through their respective counsel, hereby stipulate that the 22 above-captioned case be reversed and remanded to the Commissioner of Social Security 23 for further administrative proceedings. Upon remand, the Appeals Council will instruct 24 the Administrative Law Judge to obtain medical expert evidence as necessary; further 25 evaluate the claimant's symptom allegations; reassess the claimant's residual functional 26 capacity as necessary; and obtain vocational expert evidence. The Administrative Law 27 Judge will offer the claimant a de novo hearing, and issue a new decision. 28 1 The parties stipulate that this remand be made pursuant to sentence four of 42 2 U.S.C. § 405(g), and that Plaintiff will be entitled to reasonable attorney's fees and costs 3 pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d), upon proper 4 presentation to this Court. 5 6 DATED this 9th day of January 2018. 7 Respectfully submitted, 8 s/ Sarah Moum 9 SARAH MOUM 10 Special Assistant United States Attorney 11 DATED this 9th day of January 2018. 12 13 s/ Sarah Moum for HOWARD D. OLINSKY 14 Attorney for Plaintiff 15 (Per Authorization) 16 17 18 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 19 I hereby certify that the foregoing Stipulated Motion for Remand was filed 20 21 with the Clerk of the Court on January 9, 2018, using the CM/ECF system, which 22 will send notification of such filing to the following: Howard D. Olinsky. 23 24 s/ Sarah Moum 25 SARAH MOUM 26 Special Assistant U.S. Attorney Office of the General Counsel 27 28 2

Text of Proposed Order

1 2 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 3 4 Tami Lee Cheatham, No. CV-17-244-TUC-EJM 5 Plaintiff, 6 ORDER vs. 7 8 Nancy A. Berryhill, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, 9 10 Defendant. 11 Based on the stipulation of the parties, 12 IT IS ORDERED that the above-captioned case be reversed and remanded to the 13 Commissioner of Social Security for further administrative proceedings. Upon remand, 14 the Appeals Council will instruct the Administrative Law Judge to obtain medical expert 15 evidence as necessary; further evaluate the claimant's symptom allegations; reassess the 16 17 claimant's residual functional capacity as necessary; and obtain vocational expert 18 evidence. The Administrative Law Judge will offer the claimant a new hearing, and issue 19 a new decision. 20 This case is reversed and remanded pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 21 405(g). The parties agree that Plaintiff will be entitled to reasonable attorney's fees and 22 costs pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d), upon proper 23 presentation to this Court. 24 IT IS SO ORDERED this _________ day of, 2017. 25 26 27 28

ORDER GRANTING [22] Motion to Remand to Social Security Administration. This case is reversed and remanded pursuant to sentence four of 42 USC § 405(g). The parties agree that Plaintiff will be entitled to reasonable attorney's fees and costs pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 USC § 2412(d), upon proper presentation to this Court. Signed by Magistrate Judge Eric J Markovich on 1/9/18.

1 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 8 9 Tami Lee Cheatham, No. CV-17-00244-TUC-EJM 10 Plaintiff, ORDER 11 v. 12 Commissioner of Social Security Administration, 13 Defendant. 14 15 16 Based on the stipulation of the parties (Doc. 22), 17 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the above-captioned case be reversed and 18 remanded to the Commissioner of Social Security for further administrative proceedings. 19 Upon remand, the Appeals Council will instruct the Administrative Law Judge to obtain 20 medical expert evidence as necessary; further evaluate the claimant's symptom 21 allegations; reassess the claimant's residual functional capacity as necessary; and obtain 22 vocational expert evidence. The Administrative Law Judge will offer the claimant a new 23 hearing, and issue a new decision. 24 This case is reversed and remanded pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 25 405(g). The parties agree that Plaintiff will be entitled to reasonable attorney's fees and 26 costs pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d), upon proper 27 presentation to this Court. 28 ... 1 Dated this 9th day of January, 2018. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -2-

CLERK'S JUDGMENT: IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that pursuant to the Court's Order filed 1/10/18, this case is reversed and remanded to the Commissioner of Social Security pursuant to sentence four of 42 USC § 405(g).

1 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 8 9 Tami Lee Cheatham, NO. CV-17-00244-TUC-EJM 10 Plaintiff, JUDGMENT IN A CIVIL CASE 11 v. 12 Commissioner of Social Security Administration, 13 Defendant. 14 15 Decision by Court. This action came for consideration before the Court. The 16 issues have been considered and a decision has been rendered. 17 IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that pursuant to the Court's Order filed 18 January 10, 2018, this case is reversed and remanded to the Commissioner of Social 19 Security pursuant to sentence four of 42 USC § 405(g). 20 Brian D. Karth District Court Executive/Clerk of Court 21 22 January 10, 2018 s/ B Cortez 23 By Deputy Clerk 24 25 26 27 28

First MOTION for Attorney Fees Pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C Sect. 2412, no objections by Tami Lee Cheatham.

1 Howard D. Olinsky 2 Admitted Pro Hac Vice Olinsky Law Group 3 One Park Place 4 300 South State Street Suite 420 5 Syracuse, NY 13202 6 NY State Bar #:2044865 Telephone: (315) 701-5780 7 Facsimile: (315) 701-5781 8 Email: fedct@windisability.com 9 Attorney for Plaintiff Tami Lee Cheatham 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 11 DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 12 Tami Lee Cheatham, 13 14 Plaintiff, Civil No. 4-17-cv-00244-TUC-EJM 15 16 vs. MOTION FOR ATTORNEY'S 17 FEES PURSUANT TO THE 18 Nancy A. Berryhill, Acting EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE Commissioner of Social Security, ACT, 28 U.S.C.A. § 2412 (WEST) 19 20 Defendant 21 22 PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR ATTORNEY'S FEES PURSUANT TO THE 23 EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT, 28 U.S.C.A. § 2412 (WEST) 24 25 COUNSEL: 26 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that upon the annexed affirmation of Howard 27 D. Olinsky, attorney for the plaintiff, and other papers, the plaintiff will make a 28 Page 1 1 motion before Hon. Eric J. Markovich, at Sandra Day O'Connor U.S. Courthouse, 2 Suite 522, 401 West Washington Street, SPC 50, Phoenix, AZ 85003 on a date to 3 4 be set by the court, for an order: 5 1. Awarding an Equal Access to Justice Act Counsel Fee for $6,020.67, and 6 7 2. Awarding Expenses in the amount of $17.67; and 8 3. If the Plaintiff has no debt registered with the Department of Treasury 9 subject to offset that the fees be made payable to the attorney. 10 11 Plaintiff, by her attorney, Howard D. Olinsky moves the court for an award to be 12 13 paid by the Defendant under the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C.A. § 2412. 14 15 Plaintiff may receive an award under the Equal Access to Justice Act because she 16 17 is the prevailing party, is an individual whose net worth did not exceed two 18 million dollars when the action was filed, and the position of the United States in 19 this litigation and/or at the agency was not substantially justified. Although the 20 21 burden of proof on substantial justification is on the government, Plaintiff's 22 supporting memorandum briefly addresses this issue. 23 24 25 There are no special circumstances in this case which make an award under the 26 EAJA unjust. 27 28 Page 2

Proposed Order

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 10 11 12 Tami Lee Cheatham, Civil No. 4-17-cv-00244-TUC-EJM 13 Plaintiff, 14 15 vs. (PROPOSED) ORDER AWARDING ATTORNEY'S FEES 16 PURSUANT TO THE EQUAL 17 Nancy A. Berryhill, Acting ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT, 18 Commissioner of Social Security, 28 U.S.C. § 2412(D) 19 Defendant 20 21 (Proposed) Order Awarding Attorney's Fees 22 pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 23 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d) 24 25 Before the Court is the Motion of Plaintiff Tami Lee Cheatham, for award 26 of attorney's fees pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 27 2412(d). Based on the pleadings as well as the position of the defendant 28 Page 1 1 commissioner, if any, and recognizing the Plaintiff's waiver of direct payment and 2 assignment of EAJA to her counsel, 3 4 5 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that attorney fees, costs, and expenses in the 6 total amount of Six Thousand Thirty-Eight Dollars and Thirty-Four Cents 7 8 ($6,038.34) pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d) are 9 awarded to Plaintiff. Astrue v. Ratliff, 130 S.Ct. 2521 (2010). 10 11 If the U.S. Department of the Treasury determines that Plaintiff's EAJA 12 13 fees are not subject to offset allowed under the Department of the Treasury's 14 Offset Program (TOPS), then the check for EAJA fees shall be made payable to 15 Plaintiff's attorney, Howard D. Olinsky. 16 17 18 Whether the check is made payable to Plaintiff or to Howard D. Olinsky, 19 20 21 the check shall be mailed to Howard D. Olinsky at the following address: 22 300 South State Street 23 Suite 420 Syracuse, NY 13202 24 25 DATED: 26 27 __________________________ 28 Page 2

AFFIDAVIT in Support re: [25] First MOTION for Attorney Fees Pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C Sect. 2412, no objections filed by Tami Lee Cheatham.

1 Howard D. Olinsky 2 Admitted Pro Hac Vice Olinsky Law Group 3 One Park Place 4 300 South State Street Suite 420 5 Syracuse, NY 13202 6 NY State Bar #:2044865 Telephone: (315) 701-5780 7 Facsimile: (315) 701-5781 8 Email: fedct@windisability.com 9 Attorney for Plaintiff Tami Lee Cheatham 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 11 DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 12 Tami Lee Cheatham, 13 14 Plaintiff, Civil No. 4-17-cv-00244-TUC-EJM 15 16 vs. Attorney's affirmation in support of 17 Fees Pursuant to the Equal Access to 18 Nancy A. Berryhill, Acting Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412 19 Commissioner of Social Security, 20 Defendant 21 22 Attorney's Affirmation in Support of Fees Pursuant to the Equal Access to 23 Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412 ________________________________________ 24 25 Howard D. Olinsky, being duly sworn deposes and states: 26 27 1. I am an attorney licensed to practice law in the State of New York, 28 admitted to practice pro hac vice before this Court. Page 4 1 2. I make this affirmation knowing that the Court will rely upon it in 2 assessing any awards under the Equal Access to Justice Act. 28 U.S.C.A. § 2412. 3 4 3. There are no special circumstances in this case which make an award 5 under the EAJA unjust. 6 4. The Court ordered on January 10, 2018 that the above-entitled case 7 8 be remanded for further administrative proceedings, under the fourth sentence of 9 42 U.S.C.A. § 405(g) (West). 10 5. For the Equal Access to Justice Act, I am requesting an hourly rate 11 of $196.79 for attorney time through 2017 and 2018. See generally, 12 13 http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/content/view.php?pk_id=0000000039 U.S.C.A 9th 14 Circuit EAJA Table. If attorney fees are calculated at this rate for 6.8 hours of 15 work performed in 2017 and 2018 they total $1,338.17. 16 17 6. I am requesting $125 per hour for 30.9 hours of law clerk time 18 equaling $3,862.50. I am also requesting $100.00 per hour for 8.2 hours of 19 paralegal time equaling $820.00. I am requesting $6,020.67 for Counsel Fees 20 21 which include attorney and paralegal time. 22 7. The time accounting is presented to the court in two fashions. 23 Exhibit A is the time spent by all who worked on this case in chronological 24 25 sequence. Exhibit B is broken down by attorneys. The attorneys involved in this 26 case are Howard D. Olinsky, Esq., and Edward A. Wicklund, Esq. Exhibit C is 27 the law clerk, Shannon McGlew. Exhibit D is broken down by paralegals. The 28 Page 5 1 paralegals involved in this case are Kyrsten Gifford, Vincent Wisehoon, Michelle 2 Callahan, and Jonnah Graser. 3 4 8. I am requesting reimbursement of expenses of $17.67 for Certified 5 Mail for the summons and complaint to the defendant's office's as shown on 6 Exhibit E. The Supreme Court has clarified that only the items specifically listed 7 8 in 28 U.S.C. §1920 are compensable as costs. See Crawford Fitting Co. v. J. T. 9 Gibbons, Inc., 482 U.S. 437, 107 S. Ct. 2494, 96 L. Ed. 2d 385 (1987). 28 10 U.S.C.A. § 1920 (West) provides: 11 A judge or clerk of any court of the United States may tax as costs the 12 following: 13 a.) fees of the clerk and marshal; b.) fees of the court reporter for all or any part of the stenographic transcript 14 necessarily obtained for use in the case; 15 c.) fees and disbursements for printing and witnesses; d.) fees for exemplification and copies of papers necessarily obtained for 16 use in the case; 17 e.) docket fees under section 1923 of this title; f.) compensation of court appointed experts, compensation of interpreters, 18 and salaries, fees, expenses, and costs of special interpretation services under 19 section 1828 of this title. 20 21 The postage fee to serve process by certified mail is reimbursable as an 22 expense. 23 9. The attached records were contemporaneously created and stored in 24 25 the firm's Prevail Database, and are printed out and attached. The itemized time 26 represents hours spent preparing and handling this case for U.S. District Court. 27 Clerical time is not included in this petition or has been zeroed out. 28 Page 6 1 Waiver of Direct Payment of EAJA Fees 2 10. Attached is an Affidavit and Waiver of Direct Payment duly 3 4 executed by the plaintiff (Exhibit F). With this Waiver, if Plaintiff owes a debt 5 that qualifies under the Treasury Offset Program (31 U.S.C.A. § 3716 (West)), any 6 payment shall be made payable to the Plaintiff and delivered to the Plaintiff's 7 8 attorney. If the United States Department of Treasury determines that Plaintiff 9 owes no debt subject to offset, the government may accept the assignment of 10 EAJA fees and pay such fees directly to the Plaintiff's attorney. Astrue v. Ratliff, 11 560 U.S. 586, 130 S. Ct. 2521, 177 L. Ed. 2d 91 (2010). 12 13 14 WHEREFORE, because all four elements of an allowable application for 15 EAJA fees have been proven, petitioner requests that the Court issue an order: 16 17 1. Awarding an Equal Access to Justice Act Counsel Fee for $6,020.67; 18 and 19 2. Awarding Expenses in the amount of $17.67; and 20 21 3. If the Plaintiff has no debt registered with the Department of Treasury 22 subject to offset that the fees be made payable to the attorney. 23 24 25 Executed this April 9, 2018 26 Respectfully submitted, 27 /s/ Howard D. Olinsky 28 Howard D. Olinsky, Esq. Page 7 1 Admitted Pro Hac Vice 2 Attorney for Plaintiff Email: fedct@windisability.com 3 4 5 To: Elizabeth Strange, Esq. 6 Acting United States Attorney District of Arizona 7 8 Sarah Moum Special Assistant United States Attorney 9 Office of the General Counsel Social Security Administration 10 701 Fifth Avenue, Suite 2900 M/S 221A 11 Seattle, WA 98104-7075 State Bar No. WA42086 12 Fax: (206) 615-2531 13 Email: sarah.moum@ssa.gov Telephone: (206) 615-2936 14 15 Attorneys for Defendant 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Page 8

Exhibit A All Professional Time

Exhibit A Ledger Cheatham, Tami Lee Date  Subject Hours Timekeeper 4/24/2017 Files received, reviewed and processed from referral source 0.6 Gifford, Kyrsten 4/24/2017 Correspondence to client re: Prospect Acknowledgement Letter 0.2 Gifford, Kyrsten 4/24/2017 Telephone call with Client re: Debt conference call, explained eaja 0.4 Gifford, Kyrsten 5/11/2017 Review decisions and evidence to determine whether to appeal case 1 Olinsky, Howard D. 5/15/2017 Federal court prospect packet prepared for Client completion 0.6 Gifford, Kyrsten 5/17/2017 Telephone call with Client re: Assistance with in forma pauperis application 0.5 Vincent Wisehoon 5/17/2017 FDC prospect packet sent to Client via Right Signature 0.2 Vincent Wisehoon 5/18/2017 FDC prospect packet returned via Right Signature, reviewed for completion 0.3 Vincent Wisehoon 5/26/2017 Draft Complaint, Proposed Summons, Letter to Clerk, and Civil Cover Sheet 0.6 Olinsky, Howard D. 5/26/2017 Review motion to proceed in forma pauperis, approve for filing 0.2 Olinsky, Howard D. 5/30/2017 Draft application for Pro Hac Vice admission 0 Olinsky, Howard D. 5/31/2017 Review case assigned Hon. Eric J. Markovich, research ind. rules & practices 0.3 Olinsky, Howard D. 5/31/2017 Review order granting pro hac vice admission 0 Olinsky, Howard D. 6/23/2017 Review order granting In Forma Pauperis application, directing service 0.1 Olinsky, Howard D. 6/23/2017 Review scheduling order, calender deadlines on task pad 0.2 Olinsky, Howard D. 6/28/2017 Review summons as issued to Commissioner of SSA 0.2 Olinsky, Howard D. 7/12/2017 Federal Court-Service of Process-prepare service packets USAO, OGC, AG 0.6 Callahan, Michelle 7/12/2017 Review magistrate election form 0.1 Olinsky, Howard D. 7/24/2017 Review notice of request for e-notices by J.Cole Hernandez 0.1 Olinsky, Howard D. 7/27/2017 Compile and file proof of service via CM / ECF 0.3 Callahan, Michelle 7/28/2017 Review service executed, confirm scheduling order calendared 0.2 Olinsky, Howard D. 8/4/2017 Review order to show cause for failure to consent to Magistrate 0.1 Olinsky, Howard D. 8/4/2017 Executed Magistrate Consent 0.1 Graser, Jonnah 8/4/2017 Correspondence to Clerk of Court re: MJ Consent, mailed USPS 0.1 Lockwood, Tamica 8/8/2017 Review text entry re: Magistrate consent 0 Olinsky, Howard D. 8/18/2017 Review notice of appearance by Sarah Moum o/b/o Commissioner of SSA 0.1 Olinsky, Howard D. 9/11/2017 Review consent to magistrate; Judge Eric J. Markovich, by all parties 0.1 Olinsky, Howard D. 9/15/2017 Review answer to complaint 0.1 Olinsky, Howard D. 9/22/2017 Combine, strip PDF/A, OCR and live bookmark federal court transcript (1212 pgs) 1.2 Gifford, Kyrsten 9/22/2017 Preliminary review of transcript - assign Attorney writer 0.5 Wicklund, Edward A. 11/13/2017 Review certified administrative record and take notes 7.3 McGlew, Shannon 11/14/2017 Extension to file plaintiffs brief filed 2.5 McGlew, Shannon 11/15/2017 Review motion for extension of time and proposed order 0 Olinsky, Howard D. 11/15/2017 Review order granting extension to file plaintiffs brief 0 Olinsky, Howard D. 11/30/2017 Continue reviewing certified administrative record, take notes, organize facts 0.7 McGlew, Shannon 12/1/2017 Drafting procedural section, drafting facts 9.3 McGlew, Shannon 12/2/2017 Research issues and drafting argument 10.9 McGlew, Shannon 12/4/2017 Senior Attorney review draft brief, suggest edits 1.4 Wicklund, Edward A. 12/4/2017 Implement suggested edits, finalize and file brief (n/c for filing) 0.2 McGlew, Shannon 1/3/2018 Email correspondence with OC re: Extension to file response brief 0.1 Olinsky, Howard D. 1/3/2018 Review motion for extension of time to file response brief by defendant 0.1 Olinsky, Howard D. 1/4/2018 Review order granting extension to file response brief 0.1 Olinsky, Howard D. 45.90  (Type = Time) and (Client = Tami Lee Cheatham)    Date  Subject Hours Timekeeper 1/9/2018 Email correspondence with OC re: Remand negotiations 0.2 Olinsky, Howard D. 1/10/2018 Review motion to remand (1 page) 0.1 Olinsky, Howard D. 1/10/2018 Review proposed order to remand (1 page) 0.1 Olinsky, Howard D. 1/11/2018 Review clerks judgment to remand (1 page) 0.1 Olinsky, Howard D. 1/11/2018 Review order granting remand (1 page) 0.2 Olinsky, Howard D. 1/11/2018 Federal Court-Remand Referral back to Referral Source 0.3 Graser, Jonnah 1/11/2018 Correspondence to Client re: FDC Remand 0.2 Graser, Jonnah 2/2/2018 Telephone conf. re: Remand 0.2 Gifford, Kyrsten 4/4/2018 EAJA Preparation 1.5 Graser, Jonnah 4/4/2018 Review Slips and Finalize EAJA Motion 0.5 Olinsky, Howard D. 4/6/2018 Ready EAJA Narrative, Time Records, Exhibits, Certificate. File per Local Rule 0.9 Graser, Jonnah 45.90  (Type = Time) and (Client = Tami Lee Cheatham)   

Exhibit B Attorney Time

Exhibit B Ledger Cheatham, Tami Lee Date  Subject Hours Timekeeper 5/11/2017 Review decisions and evidence to determine whether to appeal case 1 Olinsky, Howard D. 5/26/2017 Draft Complaint, Proposed Summons, Letter to Clerk, and Civil Cover Sheet 0.6 Olinsky, Howard D. 5/26/2017 Review motion to proceed in forma pauperis, approve for filing 0.2 Olinsky, Howard D. 5/30/2017 Draft application for Pro Hac Vice admission 0 Olinsky, Howard D. 5/31/2017 Review case assigned Hon. Eric J. Markovich, research ind. rules & practices 0.3 Olinsky, Howard D. 5/31/2017 Review order granting pro hac vice admission 0 Olinsky, Howard D. 6/23/2017 Review order granting In Forma Pauperis application, directing service 0.1 Olinsky, Howard D. 6/23/2017 Review scheduling order, calender deadlines on task pad 0.2 Olinsky, Howard D. 6/28/2017 Review summons as issued to Commissioner of SSA 0.2 Olinsky, Howard D. 7/12/2017 Review magistrate election form 0.1 Olinsky, Howard D. 7/24/2017 Review notice of request for e-notices by J.Cole Hernandez 0.1 Olinsky, Howard D. 7/28/2017 Review service executed, confirm scheduling order calendared 0.2 Olinsky, Howard D. 8/4/2017 Review order to show cause for failure to consent to Magistrate 0.1 Olinsky, Howard D. 8/8/2017 Review text entry re: Magistrate consent 0 Olinsky, Howard D. 8/18/2017 Review notice of appearance by Sarah Moum o/b/o Commissioner of SSA 0.1 Olinsky, Howard D. 9/11/2017 Review consent to magistrate; Judge Eric J. Markovich, by all parties 0.1 Olinsky, Howard D. 9/15/2017 Review answer to complaint 0.1 Olinsky, Howard D. 9/22/2017 Preliminary review of transcript - assign Attorney writer 0.5 Wicklund, Edward A. 11/15/2017 Review motion for extension of time and proposed order 0 Olinsky, Howard D. 11/15/2017 Review order granting extension to file plaintiffs brief 0 Olinsky, Howard D. 12/4/2017 Senior Attorney review draft brief, suggest edits 1.4 Wicklund, Edward A. 1/3/2018 Email correspondence with OC re: Extension to file response brief 0.1 Olinsky, Howard D. 1/3/2018 Review motion for extension of time to file response brief by defendant 0.1 Olinsky, Howard D. 1/4/2018 Review order granting extension to file response brief 0.1 Olinsky, Howard D. 1/9/2018 Email correspondence with OC re: Remand negotiations 0.2 Olinsky, Howard D. 1/10/2018 Review motion to remand (1 page) 0.1 Olinsky, Howard D. 1/10/2018 Review proposed order to remand (1 page) 0.1 Olinsky, Howard D. 1/11/2018 Review clerks judgment to remand (1 page) 0.1 Olinsky, Howard D. 1/11/2018 Review order granting remand (1 page) 0.2 Olinsky, Howard D. 4/4/2018 Review Slips and Finalize EAJA Motion 0.5 Olinsky, Howard D. 6.80  (Type = Time) and (Client = Tami Lee Cheatham) and ((Timekeeper = Olinsky, Howard D.) or (Timekeeper = Wicklund, Edward A.))   

Exhibit C Law Clerk Time

Exhibit C Ledger Cheatham, Tami Lee Date  Subject Hours Timekeeper 11/13/2017 Review certified administrative record and take notes 7.3 McGlew, Shannon 11/14/2017 Extension to file plaintiffs brief filed 2.5 McGlew, Shannon 11/30/2017 Continue reviewing certified administrative record, take notes, organize facts 0.7 McGlew, Shannon 12/1/2017 Drafting procedural section, drafting facts 9.3 McGlew, Shannon 12/2/2017 Research issues and drafting argument 10.9 McGlew, Shannon 12/4/2017 Implement suggested edits, finalize and file brief (n/c for filing) 0.2 McGlew, Shannon 30.90  (Type = Time) and (Client = Tami Lee Cheatham) and (Timekeeper = McGlew, Shannon)   

Exhibit D Paralegal Time

Exhibit D Ledger Cheatham, Tami Lee Date  Subject Hours Timekeeper 4/24/2017 Files received, reviewed and processed from referral source 0.6 Gifford, Kyrsten 4/24/2017 Correspondence to client re: Prospect Acknowledgement Letter 0.2 Gifford, Kyrsten 4/24/2017 Telephone call with Client re: Debt conference call, explained eaja 0.4 Gifford, Kyrsten 5/15/2017 Federal court prospect packet prepared for Client completion 0.6 Gifford, Kyrsten 5/17/2017 Telephone call with Client re: Assistance with in forma pauperis application 0.5 Vincent Wisehoon 5/17/2017 FDC prospect packet sent to Client via Right Signature 0.2 Vincent Wisehoon 5/18/2017 FDC prospect packet returned via Right Signature, reviewed for completion 0.3 Vincent Wisehoon 7/12/2017 Federal Court-Service of Process-prepare service packets USAO, OGC, AG 0.6 Callahan, Michelle 7/27/2017 Compile and file proof of service via CM / ECF 0.3 Callahan, Michelle 8/4/2017 Executed Magistrate Consent 0.1 Graser, Jonnah 8/4/2017 Correspondence to Clerk of Court re: MJ Consent, mailed USPS 0.1 Lockwood, Tamica 9/22/2017 Combine, strip PDF/A, OCR and live bookmark federal court transcript (1212 pgs) 1.2 Gifford, Kyrsten 1/11/2018 Federal Court-Remand Referral back to Referral Source 0.3 Graser, Jonnah 1/11/2018 Correspondence to Client re: FDC Remand 0.2 Graser, Jonnah 2/2/2018 Telephone conf. re: Remand 0.2 Gifford, Kyrsten 4/4/2018 EAJA Preparation 1.5 Graser, Jonnah 4/6/2018 Ready EAJA Narrative, Time Records, Exhibits, Certificate. File per Local Rule 0.9 Graser, Jonnah 8.20  (Type = Time) and (Client = Tami Lee Cheatham) and ((Timekeeper = Callahan, Michelle) or (Timekeeper = Gifford, Kyrsten) or (Timekeeper = Graser, Jonna...   

Exhibit E Expenses

Exhibit E Ledger Cheatham, Tami Lee Date Date Subject Amount Timekeeper $ 17. 67 Callahan, Michelle 7 / 12 / 2017 Federal Court - Service of Process - prepare service packets USAO, OGC, AG $ 17. 67 Type = Cost)

Exhibit F Affirmation and Waiver of Direct Payment of EAJA Fees

Exhibit F UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF ARIZONA (TUSCON DIVISION) -------------------------------------------------------------- TAMI LEE CHEATHAM, AFFIRMATION AND WAIVER OF DIRECT PAYMENT Plaintiff, OF EAJA FEES v. Civil Action No.: _________________ NANCY A. BERRYHILL, COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant. --------------------------------------------------------------- Tami Lee Cheatham, hereby states the following: 1. I am the Plaintiff in the above-captioned matter. 2. That I have retained Olinsky Law Group as my attorney for the above-captioned matter. 3. At the time that this action was begun, my net worth was less than $2,000,000.00. 4. If my case is remanded by the Federal Court, either by stipulation or order, my attorney may file for attorney's fees pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA). I understand that the EAJA fees are paid by the Federal Government and do not come from any back benefits owed to me by the Social Security Administration. 5. I hereby agree to waive direct payment of the EAJA fees and assign said fees to be paid directly to my attorney. 6. I understand that my attorney may still petition the Administration for legal fees for his or her work before the Administration that will be paid from my back benefits. As the Plaintiff in this case, I hereby declare and affirm under penalty of perjury that the information above is true and correct. Executed on May 17, 2017. __________________________ Tami Lee Cheatham Plaintiff

Memorandum in Support

1 Howard D. Olinsky 2 Admitted Pro Hac Vice Olinsky Law Group 3 One Park Place 4 300 South State Street Suite 420 5 Syracuse, NY 13202 6 NY State Bar #:2044865 Telephone: (315) 701-5780 7 Facsimile: (315) 701-5781 8 Email: fedct@windisability.com 9 Attorney for Plaintiff Tami Lee Cheatham 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 11 DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 12 Tami Lee Cheatham, 13 14 Plaintiff, Civil No. 4-17-cv-00244-TUC-EJM 15 16 vs. MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF 17 PLAINTIFF'S PETITION FOR 18 Nancy A. Berryhill, Acting COUNSEL FEES ALLOWANCE Commissioner of Social Security, UNDER EQUAL ACCESS TO 19 JUSTICE ACT, 28 U.S.C. § 2412 20 Defendant 21 22 Memorandum in Support of Plaintiff's Petition for Counsel Fees 23 Allowance Under Equal Access to Justice Act 24 1. This is a memorandum in support of a petition for an award of 25 Counsel Fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act 28 U.S.C.A. § 2412 "EAJA." 26 27 28 Page 9 1 2. An EAJA award is available to a "prevailing party" in a case against 2 the Federal Government, including Social Security cases, in the following 3 4 instances: 5 (a) When and if the plaintiff actually "prevails"; 6 (b) The Government's position in litigation is "not substantially 7 8 justified"; 9 (c) Plaintiff is a party whose net assets are worth less than two 10 million dollars; and 11 (d) The case has concluded with a "final order" which is non- 12 13 appealable, or will not be appealed. 14 3. Addressing these elements in reverse order, it is clear that the 15 Plaintiff has met the burden necessary to receive EAJA fees. 16 17 (a) Plaintiff's net worth did not exceed $2,000,000.00 when this 18 action was filed. 19 (b) After service of the summons and complaint, and filing of 20 21 brief by the Plaintiff, parties filed a stipulation to remand, the Court issued a 22 Decision and Order remanding to the Commissioner for further administrative 23 proceedings under sentence four 42 U.S.C.A. § 405(g). 24 25 (c) Judgment was entered on January 10, 2018. The Judgment 26 has not been appealed. 27 (d) Plaintiff has prevailed because the District Court remanded 28 Page 10 1 the case under sentence four of 42 U.S.C.A. § 405(g). Shalala v. Schaefer, 509 2 U.S. 292, 113 S. Ct. 2625, 125 L. Ed. 2d 239 (1993). 3 4 4. The commissioner was not substantially justified. As the U. S. 5 Supreme Court has held, "the required 'not substantially justified' allegation imposes no 6 proof burden on the fee applicant. It is, as its text conveys, nothing more than an 7 8 allegation or pleading requirement. The burden of establishing 'that the position of the 9 United States was substantially justified' … must be shouldered by the Government." 10 Scarborough v. Principi, 541 U.S. 401, 124 S. Ct. 1856, 158 L. Ed. 2d 674 (2004) 11 While the fee applicant such as Plaintiff is required to "show" three of the 12 13 four elements—prevailing party status, financial eligibility, and amount sought— 14 Plaintiff need only "to allege" that the position of the government is not 15 substantially justified. Id. 16 17 WHEREFORE, because all four elements of an allowable application for 18 EAJA fees have been proven, petitioner requests that the Court issue an order: 19 20 1. Awarding an Equal Access to Justice Act Counsel Fee for $6,020.67; 21 and 22 2. Awarding Expenses in the amount of $17.67; and 23 3. If the Plaintiff has no debt registered with the Department of Treasury 24 25 subject to offset that the fees be made payable to the attorney. 26 27 28 Page 11 1 Executed this April 9, 2018 2 3 Respectfully submitted, 4 /s/ Howard D. Olinsky 5 Howard D. Olinsky, Esq. 6 Admitted Pro Hac Vice Attorney for Plaintiff 7 Email: fedct@windisability.com 8 To: Elizabeth Strange, Esq. 9 Acting United States Attorney 10 District of Arizona 11 Sarah Moum 12 Special Assistant United States Attorney Office of the General Counsel 13 Social Security Administration 701 Fifth Avenue, Suite 2900 M/S 221A 14 Seattle, WA 98104-7075 15 State Bar No. WA42086 Fax: (206) 615-2531 16 Email: sarah.moum@ssa.gov 17 Telephone: (206) 615-2936 18 Attorneys for Defendant 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Page 12

Certificate of Service

1 Howard D. Olinsky 2 Admitted Pro Hac Vice Olinsky Law Group 3 One Park Place 4 300 South State Street Suite 420 5 Syracuse, NY 13202 6 NY State Bar #:2044865 Telephone: (315) 701-5780 7 Facsimile: (315) 701-5781 8 Email: fedct@windisability.com 9 Attorney for Plaintiff Tami Lee Cheatham 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 11 DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 12 Tami Lee Cheatham, 13 14 Plaintiff, Civil No. 4-17-cv-00244-TUC-EJM 15 vs. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 16 17 18 Nancy A. Berryhill, Acting 19 Commissioner of Social Security, 20 Defendant 21 22 Certificate of Service 23 I certify that I have electronically moved for EAJA fees with the Clerk of 24 25 the District Court using the CM/ECF system, which sent notification of such filing 26 to: 27 28 Page 15 1 To: Elizabeth Strange, Esq. 2 Acting United States Attorney District of Arizona 3 4 Sarah Moum Special Assistant United States Attorney 5 Office of the General Counsel 6 Social Security Administration 701 Fifth Avenue, Suite 2900 M/S 221A 7 Seattle, WA 98104-7075 8 State Bar No. WA42086 Fax: (206) 615-2531 9 Email: sarah.moum@ssa.gov Telephone: (206) 615-2936 10 11 Attorneys for Defendant 12 13 April 9, 2018 14 /s/ Howard D. Olinsky 15 Howard D. Olinsky, Esq. 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Page 16

Certificate of Local Rule 54.2 (D) (1) (f)

1 Howard D. Olinsky 2 Admitted Pro Hac Vice Olinsky Law Group 3 One Park Place 4 300 South State Street Suite 420 5 Syracuse, NY 13202 6 NY State Bar #:2044865 Telephone: (315) 701-5780 7 Facsimile: (315) 701-5781 8 Email: fedct@windisability.com 9 Attorney for Plaintiff Tami Lee Cheatham 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 11 DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 12 Tami Lee Cheatham, 13 14 Plaintiff, Civil No. 4-17-cv-00244-TUC-EJM 15 16 vs. CERTIFICATE OF LOCAL RULE 17 54.2 (D) (1) 18 Nancy A. Berryhill, Acting 19 Commissioner of Social Security, 20 Defendant 21 22 Certificate of Local Rule 54.2 (D) (1) 23 I certify that I have conferred with Counsel for Defendant via emails on 24 25 April 9, 2018 regarding Plaintiff's Motion for Attorney's Fees Pursuant to the 26 Equal Access to Justice Act. Opposing counsel has no objection Plaintiff's 27 request. 28 Page 13 1 To: Elizabeth Strange, Esq. 2 Acting United States Attorney District of Arizona 3 4 Sarah Moum Special Assistant United States Attorney 5 Office of the General Counsel 6 Social Security Administration 701 Fifth Avenue, Suite 2900 M/S 221A 7 Seattle, WA 98104-7075 8 State Bar No. WA42086 Fax: (206) 615-2531 9 Email: sarah.moum@ssa.gov Telephone: (206) 615-2936 10 11 Attorneys for Defendant 12 April 9, 2018 13 /s/ Howard D. Olinsky 14 Howard D. Olinsky, Esq. 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Page 14

Order on Motion for Attorney Fees

1 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 8 9 Tami Lee Cheatham, No. CV-17-00244-TUC-EJM 10 Plaintiff, ORDER 11 v. 12 Commissioner of Social Security Administration, 13 Defendant. 14 15 16 Based on Plaintiff's motion for attorney's fees pursuant to the Equal Access to 17 Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d), and no opposition from Defendant appearing, 18 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED granting Plaintiff's Motion. (Doc. 25). Attorney 19 fees, costs, and expenses in the total amount of Six Thousand Thirty-Eight Dollars and 20 Thirty-Four Cents ($6,038.34) pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 21 2412(d) are awarded to Plaintiff. Astrue v. Ratliff, 130 S. Ct. 2521 (2010). 22 It is further ordered that if, after receiving the Court's EAJA fee order, the 23 Commissioner determines upon effectuation of the Court's EAJA fee order that Plaintiff 24 does not owe a debt that is subject to offset under the Treasury Offset Program, the fees 25 will be made payable to Plaintiff's attorney. However, if there is a debt owed that is 26 subject to offset under the Treasury Offset Program, the remaining EAJA fees after offset 27 will be paid by a check made out to Plaintiff but delivered to Plaintiff's attorney Howard 28 D. Olinsky. Whether the check is made payable to Plaintiff or to Howard D. Olinsky, the 1 check shall be mailed to Howard D. Olinsky at the following address: 2 300 South State Street 3 Suite 420 4 Syracuse, NY 13202 5 Dated this 24th day of May, 2018. 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -2-

Interested in this case?

Sign up to receive real-time updates
Last full docket sheet refresh: 404 days ago. Refresh now
#
Datesort arrow up
Description
05/30/2017
Remark: Pro hac vice motion granted for Howard D Olinsky on behalf of plaintiff. This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no PDF document associated with this entry. (Text entry; no document attached.)
1
05/26/2017
COMPLAINT filed by Tami Lee Cheatham.
1
Civil Cover Sheet
2
Exhibit A)(DLC
2 Attachments
2
05/26/2017
APPLICATION for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis by Tami Lee Cheatham.
3
05/26/2017
SUMMONS Submitted by Tami Lee Cheatham.
1
Summons
2
Summons)(DLC
2 Attachments
4
05/26/2017
This case has been assigned to the Honorable Eric J Markovich. All future pleadings or documents should bear the correct case number: 4:17-CV-00244-TUC-EJM. Magistrate Election form attached.
05/30/2017
Remark: Pro hac vice motion granted for Howard D Olinsky on behalf of plaintiff. This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no PDF document associated with this entry. (Text entry; no document attached.)
5
06/23/2017
ORDER granting 2 Motion for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis. Signed by Magistrate Judge Eric J Markovich on 6/23/17.
6
06/23/2017
SCHEDULING ORDER: Within 60 days after the answer is filed, Plaintiff must file an opening brief. Signed by Magistrate Judge Eric J Markovich on 6/23/17. (See attached PDF for complete information.)
7
06/28/2017
Summons Issued as to Commissioner of Social Security Administration, United States Attorney General and United States Attorney's Office. *** IMPORTANT: When printing the summons, select "Document and stamps" or "Document and comments" for the seal to appear on the document.
1
Summons
2
Summons)(KEP
2 Attachments
8
07/12/2017
Magistrate Election Form Deadline resent on this date.
07/21/2017
NOTICE of request for e-notices by J. Cole Hernandez. (Text entry; no document attached.)
9
07/27/2017
SERVICE EXECUTED filed by Tami Lee Cheatham: Return of Service re: Summons, Complaint and Scheduling Order upon US Attorney's Office, Office of General Counsel, Attorney General on 7/20/2017.
10
08/03/2017
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE for failure to comply with LRCiv 3.7(b). Show Cause Hearing is set for 9/11/17 at 10:20 AM, before Chief Judge Raner C Collins.
11
08/08/2017
Agreement to Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction. Party agrees to Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction. This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no PDF document associated with this entry.
12
08/17/2017
NOTICE OF ATTORNEY APPEARANCE: Sarah Moum appearing for Commissioner of Social Security Administration.
14
09/06/2017
Minute Order: In accordance with 28 USC 636(c), all parties have voluntarily consented to have Magistrate Judge Markovich conduct all further proceedings in this case, including trial and entry of final judgment, and conduct all post-judgment proceedings, with direct review by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, if an appeal is filed. This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no PDF document associated with this entry.
15
09/15/2017
ANSWER to [1] Complaint by Commissioner of Social Security Administration.
16
09/15/2017
NOTICE of Filing Certified Copy of Administrative Transcript re: [15] Answer to Complaint filed by Commissioner of Social Security Administration.
1
Certification Page
2
Court Transcript Index
3
Documents Related to Administrative Process Including Transcript of Oral Hearin
4
Payment Documents and Decisions
5
Jurisdictional Documents and Notices
6
Non Disability Related Development
7
Disability Related Development
8
Medical Records Part 1
9
Medical Records Part 2
10
Medical Records Part 3
11
Medical Records Part 4
12
Medical Records Part 5
13
Medical Records Part 6
13 Attachments
17
11/14/2017
First MOTION for Extension of Time to file Plaintiff's Opening Brief by Tami Lee Cheatham.
1
Text of Proposed Order
1 Attachment
18
11/15/2017
ORDER GRANTING Plaintiff's unopposed [17] Motion for Extension of Time to File Opening Brief. Plaintiff shall file her opening brief on or before 12/4/17. Signed by Magistrate Judge Eric J Markovich on 11/14/17.
19
12/04/2017
OPENING BRIEF by Tami Lee Cheatham.
20
01/03/2018
First MOTION for Extension of Time to File Responsive Brief, Unopposed by Commissioner of Social Security Administration.
1
Text of Proposed Order
1 Attachment
21
01/03/2018
ORDER GRANTING defendant's [20] Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to file her response to Plaintiff's opening brief. Defendant's response to Plaintiff's opening brief is due on 1/31/18. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Eric J Markovich on 1/3/18.
22
01/09/2018
MOTION to Remand to Social Security Administration Stipulated by Commissioner of Social Security Administration.
1
Text of Proposed Order
1 Attachment
23
01/10/2018
ORDER GRANTING [22] Motion to Remand to Social Security Administration. This case is reversed and remanded pursuant to sentence four of 42 USC § 405(g). The parties agree that Plaintiff will be entitled to reasonable attorney's fees and costs pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 USC § 2412(d), upon proper presentation to this Court. Signed by Magistrate Judge Eric J Markovich on 1/9/18.
24
01/10/2018
CLERK'S JUDGMENT: IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that pursuant to the Court's Order filed 1/10/18, this case is reversed and remanded to the Commissioner of Social Security pursuant to sentence four of 42 USC § 405(g).
25
04/09/2018
First MOTION for Attorney Fees Pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C Sect. 2412, no objections by Tami Lee Cheatham.
1
Proposed Order
1 Attachment
26
04/09/2018
AFFIDAVIT in Support re: [25] First MOTION for Attorney Fees Pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C Sect. 2412, no objections filed by Tami Lee Cheatham.
1
Exhibit A All Professional Time
2
Exhibit B Attorney Time
3
Exhibit C Law Clerk Time
4
Exhibit D Paralegal Time
5
Exhibit E Expenses
6
Exhibit F Affirmation and Waiver of Direct Payment of EAJA Fees
7
Memorandum in Support
8
Certificate of Service
9
Certificate of Local Rule 54.2 (D) (1) (f)
9 Attachments
27
05/24/2018
Order on Motion for Attorney Fees
Would you like this case removed from DocketBird? Request removal.