TEXT CAPTURE of web page (case summary; no file download of the opinion offered by this source)
Source URL: https://www.studicata.com/summaries/united-states-district-court-middle-district-of-pennsylvania/chopko-v-kijakazi-2023-9ksy7a/
Source: Studicata free case summary of Chopko v. Kijakazi, U.S. District Court, Middle District of Pennsylvania (2023)
Captured: 2026-10-25
NOTE: In the tree's research this case is a CANDIDATE match for Christopher Mark Chopko of Jermyn, PA (same name and district only; no source ties the plaintiff to the family). Filed as the summary the report relied on, not as the opinion itself.
---
CHOPKO v. KIJAKAZI (2023) – United States District Court, Middle District of Pennsylvania

Facts
- The plaintiff, Christopher Chopko, applied for disability benefits and supplemental security income under the Social Security Act, claiming an onset date of disability on July 24, 2019.
- He alleged various mental health impairments, including depression, schizophrenia, and anxiety.
- Following a hearing, the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) determined that Chopko was not disabled and denied his application.
- Chopko subsequently appealed this decision, asserting that the ALJ's findings were not supported by substantial evidence.
- The case proceeded through the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, where it was reviewed.
- The District Court ultimately affirmed the ALJ's decision, concluding that substantial evidence supported the findings.

Issue
- The issue was whether the ALJ's decision to deny Christopher Chopko disability benefits was supported by substantial evidence.

Holding – Carlson, J.
- The U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania held that the ALJ's decision was supported by substantial evidence and affirmed the denial of benefits.

Rule
- An ALJ's decision denying Social Security disability benefits must be supported by substantial evidence, which includes a reasonable assessment of medical evidence and the claimant's ability to perform work despite impairments.

Reasoning (condensed from the page)
- The court reviewed the ALJ's findings against Chopko's medical records and testimonies; the ALJ concluded the impairments did not meet the severity required for disability benefits and provided a detailed residual functional capacity (RFC) assessment reflecting an ability to perform simple, routine tasks in a low-stress environment, consistent with state agency consultants' opinions.
- The court noted the ALJ considered Chopko's compliance with treatment and medication, which contributed to improvements in his symptoms, and found the RFC determination appropriately articulated and within the medical opinions of record.
- The court affirmed, reiterating the deferential substantial-evidence standard: even if the evidence could support a different conclusion, the ALJ's findings stand when adequately supported.