Case Explained: UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT KENETT GREGORY v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY O P I N I O N

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit Filed: 2026-06-18 The sixth-circuit affirmed the district court’s judgment denying Kenett Gregory’s claim for social security disability insurance benefits. The court held that the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) properly applied the correct legal standards and that his findings were supported by substantial evidence. Specifically, the court found that the ALJ complied with 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520c by articulating how he evaluated the supportability and consistency of a consultative examination report from Dr. Jennifer Fishkoff. The ALJ reasonably concluded that Dr. Fishkoff’s opinion was unpersuasive because it relied largely on the claimant’s subjective complaints rather than objective medical evidence and was inconsistent with other record evidence showing unremarkable mental status findings and stable conditions. Consequently, the court determined that the ALJ did not need to discuss every piece of evidence individually but had sufficiently explained why the specific limitations identified by Dr. Fishkoff were rejected. The practical consequence is that the denial of Gregory’s benefits application stands, and she receives no relief from the Social Security Administration. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.