Professional Documents
Culture Documents
No. 14-2106
CHARLES A. BROWN,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting Commissioner of Social Security,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Asheville.
Graham C. Mullen,
Senior District Judge. (1:13-cv-00096-GCM)
Submitted:
Before GREGORY
Circuit Judge.
and
FLOYD,
Decided:
Circuit
Judges,
February 9, 2016
and
DAVIS,
Senior
PER CURIAM:
Charles
A.
Brown
appeals
the
district
courts
order
Brown
contends
that
the
ALJ
failed
to
explain
Accordingly,
will
affirm
the
Social
Security
Administrations
and
the
ALJs
substantial evidence.
Cir.
2015)
evidence
is
(internal
that
factual
findings
are
supported
by
which
marks
reasonable
omitted).
mind
might
Substantial
accept
as
mere
scintilla
of
preponderance.
evidence
but
may
be
less
than
quotation
marks
omitted).
We
do
not
reweigh
whether
evidence;
rather,
[w]here
reasonable
minds
differ,
decision.
to
decision
is
supported
conflicting
we
defer
by
substantial
evidence
to
the
allows
Commissioners
that
met
impairment;
(4)
could
(5) if
not,
economy.
could
Id.
or
equaled
return
perform
to
any
the
his
other
severity
past
of
relevant
work
in
the
listed
work;
and
national
If a decision
the
inquiry
ceases.
20
416.920(a)(4).
3
C.F.R.
404.1520(a)(4),
Brown argues that the ALJs Step Three analysis was grossly
inadequate
under
our
holding
in
Radford.
In
explaining
his
found
Radford
substantially
because
it
was
similar
devoid
explanation
of
deficient
reasoning
and
in
rendered
equal
the
criteria
Browns
medical
record
clearly
decide,
without
implicated.
Further,
of
is
Listing
not
so
analysis,
we
do
4.04C.
one-sided
that
not
We
that
Listing
accept
conclude
one
4.04C
Browns
that
could
is
not
and
the
Three,
and
it
was
error
for
the
district
court
to
do
so.
concluding
that
the
ALJ
properly
accorded
less
than
We dispense
with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are
adequately
presented
in
the
materials
before
this
court
and