Lucas v. Commissioner, Social Security Administration, No. 6:2013cv01178 - Document 29 (D. Or. 2014)

Court Description: OPINION AND ORDER. For the foregoing reasons, the Commissioner's decision is AFFIRMED. IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed on 10/28/2014 by Judge Malcolm F. Marsh. (pvh)

Download PDF
Lucas v. Commissioner, Social Security Administration Doc. 29 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON EDWARD P. LUCAS, Plaintiff, 6:13-cv-01178-MA OPINION AND ORDER v. COMMISSIONER SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINIS'l'RATION, Defendant. ALAN STUART GRAF 208 Pine Street Floyd, Virginia 24091 Attorney for Plaintiff S. AMANDA MARSHALL United States Attorney ADRIAN L. BROWN Assistant United States Attorney 1000 S.W. Third Avenue, Suite 600 Portland, Oregon 97204-2902 ERIN F. HIGHLAND Social Security Administration Office of the General Counsel 701 Fifth Avenue, Suite 2900 M/S 221A Seattle, Washington 98104 Attorneys for Defendant 1 - OPINION AND ORDER Dockets.Justia.com MARSH, Judge Plaintiff, Edward P. Lucas, brings this action for judicial review of a final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security (the Commissioner) denying his applications for disability insurance benefits (DIB) under Title II of the Social Security Act (the Act) and supplemental security benefits under Title XVI of the Act. 1381-1383f. 405 (g). income {SSI) See 4 2 U. S . C. disability 401-4 3 4, §§ This Court has jurisdiction pursuant to 42 U.S.C. For the reasons set forth below, I affirm the § final decision of the Commissioner. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Plaintiff protectively filed the instant applications for DIB and SSI on January 23, tunnel syndrome, fibromyalgia, alleging disability due to carpal degenerative "(b]ulging immunodeficiency virus disorder 2009, (PTSD), disc or (HIV), compressed depression, irritable bowel deficit disorder (ADHD). Tr. 233. neuropathy, discs," human post-traumatic stress syndrome initially and upon reconsideration. (ALJ) disease, (IBS), and attention His applications were denied An Administrative Law Judge held a .hearing on August 10, 2011, at which Plaintiff was represented by counsel and testified. On September 2, 2011, the ALJ issued a decision Plaintiff not disabled within the meaning of the Act. finding After the Appeals Council considered additional evidence and declined review 2 - OPINION AND ORDER of the ALJ's decision, Plaintiff timely filed a Complaint in this Court. Tr. 1-3. FACTUAL BACKGROUND Born on May 18, 1965, Plaintiff was 37 years old on the alleged onset date of disability and 46 years old on the date of the hearing. Plaintiff has a relevant work as a Cashier, high school equivalency and past Gas Station Attendant, Assistant Manager, and Baker. Gas Station Tr. 24, 45. Plaintiff alleges his conditions became disabling on April 1, 2003. Tr. functional 233. Plaintiff testified about his conditions limitations at the hearing and submitted and two Adult Function Reports - one in relation to the present application and the other in relation to a 2005 disability application not directly at issue in this case. Tr. 38-49, 198-205, 260-67. On June 19, 2006, Kurt Brewster, M.D., examined Plaintiff and submitted an opinion as to Plaintiff's physical limitations. 602-12. Tr. Robert Pelz, M.D., Ph.D.; Robert H. K. Choi, M.D., Ph.D.; and Paul G. Curtin, M. D., each submitted forms and letters to Plaintiff's community college concerning his functional limitations as they related to educational accommodations. 694-95, 933. Zak Schwartz, Ph.D., Tr. 690-91, 692-93, one of Plaintiff's treating psychological providers, submitted a February 20, 2009, opinion as to Plaintiff's mental conditions and functional limitations. 785-87. Tr. The record also contains a report from Carmina Angeles, 3 - OPINION AND ORDER M.D., Ph.D, who evaluated Plaintiff for purposes of Tr. treatment of Plaintiff's neck and mid-back pain. medical 1172-75. Finally, Tara R. Workman, M.D., wrote a letter dated February 9, 2012, which was first submitted to the Appeals Council, concerning Plaintiff's physical conditions. Tr. 1181. THE ALJ'S DISABILITY ANALYSIS The Commissioner has established a five-step sequential process for determining whether a person is disabled. Yuckert, 482 U.S. 137, potentially dispositi v,e. Cir. 1999). show that (1987); 416.920(a) (4) (i)-(v). 404.1520(a) (4) (i)--(v), Steps One through Four. 140-42 20 Bowen v. C.F.R. Each step §§ is The claimant bears the burden of proof at Tackett v. Apfel, 180 F.3d 1094, 1098 (9th The burden shifts to the Commissioner at Step Five to a significant number of jobs economy that the claimant can perform. exist in See Yuckert, the national 4 82 U.S. at 141-42; Tackett, 180 F.3d at 1098. At Step One the ALJ determined that Plaintiff has not engaged in substantial gainful activity since the alleged onset date, April 1, 2003. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1571 et seq., 416.971 et seq.; Tr. 13. At Step Two the ALJ found Plaintiff's degenerative disc disease; fibromyalgia; history of bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome, status post bilateral release surgery; history of left meniscal tear, status post arthroscopy; HIV-positive with mild neuropathy; 4 - OPINION AND ORDER obesity; depression; PTSD; ADHD; and history of methamphetamine use .were severe impairments. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(c}, 416.920(c}; Tr. 13-14. At Step Three the ALJ determined Plaintiff does not have an impairment or combination of impairments that meet or medically equal any listed impairment. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(d}, 404 .1525, 404 .1526, 416. 920 (d}, 416. 925, 416. 926; Tr. 15-16. The ALJ found Plaintiff has the residual functional capacity (RFC} to perform a range of light work except that Plaintiff can frequently balance and climb stairs and ramps. The ALJ found Plaintiff could perform all other postural activities occasionally, but should avoid exposure to vibration and hazards. The ALJ further limited Plaintiff to entry-level work consisting of simple one- to two-step instructions and only occasional contact with the general public. Tr. 16-24. At Step Four the ALJ found Plaintiff is unable to perform all of his past relevant work. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1565, 416.965; Tr. 24. At Step Five, significant numbers perform, however, the ALJ found that jobs in in the national economy that Plaintiff can including Laundry Sorter and Cleaner/Polisher. In the alternative, exist Tr. 25. the ALJ also found that if a limitation to "occasional use of the hands and arms for reaching, fingering, and handling were added" to the RFC, Plaintiff would be able to perform 5 - OPINION AND ORDER the occupations of Bakery Helper and Blending Tank Tender Helper. Tr. 25. Accordingly, the ALJ found Plaintiff was not disabled within the meaning of the Act. ISSUES ON REVIEW Plaintiff raises two primary issues on appeal. First, Plaintiff argues the ALJ improperly rejected Plaintff's testimony. Second, opinions Plaintiff maintains the ALJ erroneously discredited the of Ors. Pelz, Choi, Curtin, Schwartz, Angeles, and Workman. STANDARD OF REVIEW The Court must affirm the Commissioner's decision if the Commissioner applied proper legal standards and the findings are supported by substantial evidence in the record. 405(g); Andrews v. 1039 (9th Cir. Shalala, 53 F.3d 1035, 42 U.S. C. § 1995). "Substantial evidence means more than a mere scintilla but less than a preponderance; it is such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion." Court must weigh all of the evidence, whether detracts from the Commissioner's decision. 807 F.2d 771, 772 (9th Cir. 1986). to more than one rational decision must be upheld. supports The or Martinez v. Heckler, If the evidence is susceptible interpretation, Andrews, it Id. the Commissioner's 53 F. 3d at 1039-40. If the evidence supports the Commissioner's conclusion, the Commissioner 6 - OPINION AND ORDER must be affirmed; "the court may not substitute its judgment for that of the Commissioner." Edlund v. Massanari, 253 F.3d 1152, 1156 {9th Cir. 2001). DISCUSSION I. Plaintiff's Testimony Plaintiff testimony. first In argues deciding the ALJ whether to improperly accept rejected subjective testimony, an ALJ must perform two stages of analysis. § 404.1529. evidence First, of an his symptom 20 C.F.R. the claimant must produce objective medical underlying impairment that expected to produce the symptoms alleged. F.3d 1273, 1281-82 {9th Cir. 1996). could reasonably be Smolen v. Chater, 80 Second, absent a finding of malingering, the ALJ can reject the claimant's testimony about the severity of his symptoms only by offering specific, convincing reasons for doing so. for rejecting a claimant's Id. at 1281. testimony substantial evidence in the record. clear, and The ALJ's reasons must be supported by See Carmickle v. Comm'r Soc. Sec. Admin., 533 F.3d 1155, 1161 (9th Cir. 2008). If an ALJ finds the claimant's subjective symptoms unreliable, regarding his the "ALJ must make a credibility determination citing unpersuasive." Morgan v. Comm'r Soc. Sec. Admin., 169 F.3d 595, 599 (9th Cir. 1999). the testimony reasons In doing so, why the testimony is the ALJ must identify which testimony is credible and which testimony undermines the claimant's 7 - OPINION AND ORDER complaints, and make "findings sufficiently specific to permit the court to conclude that the ALJ did not arbitrarily discredit [the] claimant's testimony." Cir. 2002). The ALJ Thomas v. Barnhart, 278 F.3d 947, 958 (9th may credibility evaluation in rely upon ordinary weighing the techniques claimant's of credibility. Tommasetti v. Astrue, 533 F.3d 1035, 1039 (9th Cir. 2008). A. Plaintiff's Testimony At the hearing, Plaintiff testified he was primarily disabled by back and neck pain, and that he cannot use his hands or wrists on account of swelling, Tr. 39. As to his hand limitations, Plaintiff told the ALJ that his hands "are not usable," and that he had been suffering from such limitations "for a long time." Plaintiff testified his ＵＱｾＲＮ＠ somewhat after two surgeries, hand and wrist symptoms Tr. eased but that severe symptoms returned within six months of the second surgery. Tr. 55-56. Plaintiff additionally reported that he cannot lift his hands above his head without his arms going numb. Tr. 52. Plaintiff testified that he also has ADHD, but that Adderall helps him stay focused during school. reported the Adderall helps with Tr. 48. his reported headaches and memory problems. Although Plaintiff attention span, he also Tr. 53-54. As to his daily activities, Plaintiff reported that he takes the bus to the grocery store, which is about a mile away, but that he cannot walk to the store because of knee and ankle problems. 8 - OPINION AND ORDER Tr. Plaintiff testified that he takes classes two days per 43. week at Lane Community College, but that he can only take one class per quarter on account of his functional limitations. Tr. 44-46. In an Adult Function Report dated February 21, 2009, Plaintiff reported he wakes around 6:00 a.m., takes his medications, and eats breakfast. Tr. 260. Plaintiff reported he showers on days when he is not too sore to do so, then gets dressed and leaves for school. Tr. Plaintiff wrote he receives various accommodations at 260. school, including additional time on assignments and tests, assistance with note-taking, and late arrival and early departure privileges. Tr. 268. After school, Plaintiff reported he visits his partner, son, and dog; watches television; rests; and goes to the dog park. board games television. Tr. 268. before After dinner, returning home Plaintiff plays cards or for homework, reading, or Tr. 268. As to his ability to care for himself, Plaintiff noted he sometimes requires help with his shoes, maintains short hair for ease of care, and shaves once or twice per week. Tr. 261. Plaintiff reported he cooks simple meals daily, performs a range of housework including vacuuming, dusting, washing dishes, and wiping down counters for approximately 30 minutes once or twice per week. Tr. 262. Plaintiff wrote that he goes outside daily and shops for groceries for 45 minutes twice per month. and social activities, 9 - OPINION AND ORDER Tr. 263. As to hobbies Plaintiff noted he goes to school, reads, watches television and movies, listens to audio books, visits with family, and attends alcohol-treatment meetings. Tr. 264. Plaintiff reported, however, that his social circle is much smaller than it used to be and he cannot partake in physical activity he previously enjoyed. Tr. 264-65. With regard to his functional limitations, Plaintiff reported his conditions affect his abilities to lift, squat, bend, stand, reach, walk, sit, kneel, climb stairs, concentrate, understand, get along with others. remember, follow instructions, Tr. 265. complete tasks, use his hands, and Plaintiff reported he can only walk two or three blocks before requiring "a few minutes" of rest; cannot lift "more than a few pounds, and not repetitively;" cannot stand for more than 15 to 30 minutes without pain or numbness; and cannot sit continuously for more than 30 minutes. Tr. 265, 269. As to his memory limitations, Plaintiff reported he must re-read written instructions "several times" and frequently needs instructions repeated to him. Tr. 265. stress he causes depression and has authority figures, especially police. oral Plaintiff reported that difficulty dealing with Tr. 266. In an Adult Function Report submitted for a prior application and dated February 28, activities of daily 2005, living visiting his partner and son. Plaintiff reported largely similar including Tr. 198. watching television At that time, and Plaintiff checked that his conditions affected his abilities to lift, squat, 10 - OPINION AND ORDER bend, stand, reach, walk, sit, kneel, climb stairs, remember, complete tasks, use his hands, and get along with others. Tr. 203. Plaintiff reported he could only walk one block before requiring three to six minutes of rest. Tr. 203. B. ALJ' s Reasons for Rejecting Plaint.iff' s Testimony The ALJ findings rejected Plaintiff's testimony because clinical and objective medical evidence were inconsistent with Plaintiff's allegations and Plaintiff's activities of daily living as reported throughout the record allegations of disabling conditions. were inconsistent Tr. 17-19. with his I conclude these reasons, taken together, constitute clear and convincing reasons to reject Plaintiff's allegations of disabling conditions. 1. Clinical Findings Inconsistent with Allegations The ALJ cited many instances in which Plaintiff's allegations were not consistent with medical providers' clinical findings. As noted, Plaintiff testified that his hand and wrist conditions were. one of his primary disabling conditions and caused very significant functional limitations. The ALJ noted, frequently no strength. demonstrated deficits 381, 610, 1032, 1174. ï½¾ï½ ï½²ï¼®ï¼  as the ALJ noted, Dr. study that Plaintiff and normal grip On exam in June of 2006, Brewster "did not find signs for ongoing carpal tunnel syndrome." conduction sensory however, Tr. indicated "a 612. very An October 19, mild right 2010, carpal nerve tunnel syndrome in normal circumstances," which in light of Plaintiff's 11 - OPINION AND ORDER history of two carpal tunnel just reflect syndromes." As to residual on each wrist "could really ｳｵｲｧｾｩ･＠ changes from the prior carpal tunnel Tr. 1045. Plaintiff's back and neck pain, the ALJ noted that Plaintiff reported that medication and physical therapy had been very helpful in controlling his pain. Tr. 1147, 1187. Imaging of Plaintiff's back and neck consistently revealed mild or minimal findings. Tr. 341, 498, 882, 883, 888, 1113. Similarly, findings concerning Plaintiff's neuropathy were frequently mild. Tr. 339, 855, 877' 881, 887' 1187. The ALJ also properly noted that clinical records indicated Plaintiff's mental impairments methamphetamine cessation. improved with medication and Indeed, on November 17, 2005, Plaintiff noted his mental health symptoms appeared to be improving since he had been "off the amphetamines for a month." January of that year, a diagnosis Even as of Plaintiff had reported he had "been doing well enough" without resuming Prozac. after Tr. 412. with ADHD, Tr. mental 423. health More recently, providers Plaintiff's Adderall was· helping him work on his GED. Thereafter, Plaintiff consistently improved symptoms on Adderall. Tr. demonstrated 690, 694, 954. Tr. noted 719. significantly Finally, the ALJ reasonably noted that Plaintiff did not demonstrate memory deficits on exam commensurate with his allegations. 12 - OPINION AND ORDER Tr. 653, 1173. In the sum, ALJ appropriately noted that Plaintiff's allegations of disabling conditions were inconsistent with clinical findings throughout the record. This is a compelling reason, supported by substantial evidence, to reject Plaintiff's testimony. 2. The Inconsistency Living with ALJ also Plaintiff's testimony conditions were allegations of rejected disabling Reported Activities Plaintiff's reports of his daily activities. of Daily because his contradicted by Indeed, there are several reports of daily activities throughout the record that the ALJ could reasonably find are inconsistent with Plaintiff's allegations. On August 23, 2006, Plaintiff reported that he "dropped a transmission on his right foot." Tr. 923. On January 17, 2005, Plaintiff reported he "was moving furniture boxes around." 423. On March 19, 'fr. 550. 2004, Plaintiff reported working on his car. On August 19, 2008, Plaintiff reported "[h]e spent the weekend hunched over books and scribbling out a term paper." 865. Tr. Tr. On April 29, 2009, Plaintiff reported doing "several hours of raking." Tr. 938. Finally, on March 23, 2011, Plaintiff reported "running cin an elliptical machine at minutes. Tr. 1172. [the] gym" for at least 15 Each of these reports of activities of daily living are inconsistent with aspects of Plaintiff's reports of very limited functional capabilities in his Adult Function Reports and at the hearing. While Plaintiff reported many of these activities 13 - OPINION AND ORDER caused pain, the ALJ could reasonably find that Plaintiff's ability to complete these tasks· was inconsistent with his alleged limitations. Accordingly, the ALJ properly cited inconsistency between Plaintiff's allegations and his reported daily activities as a reason to reject Plaintiff's testimony. Plaintiff's reported activities of daily living, then, are another compelling reason, supported by substantial credibility determination. and convincing reasons, evidence, for the ALJ's adverse In sum, I conclude the ALJ cited clear supported by substantial evidence, to reject Plaintiff's testimony of disabling conditions and functional limitations. II. Medical Testimony Plaintiff opinions of Workman. next Ors. The argues Pelz, the Choi, Commissioner ALJ erroneously rejected the Schwartz, Angeles, and Curtin, must provide clear and reasons to reject the uncontradicted opinion of a examining physician. Cir. 1995). convincing treating or Lester v. Chater, 81 F.3d 821, 830-31 (9th Where a physician's opinion is contradicted by that of another physician, the ALJ may reject the physician's opinion by providing specific and legitimate reasons supported by substantial evidence in the record. Id. "'The ALJ need not accept the opinion of any physician, including a treating physician, if that opinion is brief, conclusory, 14 - OPINION AND ORDER and inadequately supported by clinical findings.'" Chaudhry v. Astrue, 688 F.3d 661, 671 (9th Cir. 2012) (quoting Bray v. Comm'r Soc. Sec. Admin., 554 F.3d 1219, 1228 (9th Cir. 2009)). the "'Where evidence, the ALJ is record contains Id. F.3d 1030, 1040 (9th Cir. 2003)). translating the claimant's limitations in the RFC. "consistent with testimony." (quoting Benton v. medical Barnhart, 331 The ALJ is responsible for conditions into functional See Stubbs-Danielson v. Astrue, 539 F.3d 1169, 1174 (9th Cir. 2008). is medical charged with determining credibility and resolving the conflict.'" it conflicting Ultimately, the RFC is sufficient if restrictions identified in the medical Id. A. Drs. Pelz, Choi, and Curtin The record contains Curtin submitted to statements Lane from Community College establishing classroom accommodations. 1 95, 933. Dr. Drs. Pelz, for Tr. 690-91, Choi, purposes and of 692-93, 694- All three providers were treating sources. Pelz listed Plaintiff's fibromyalgia[,) chronic pain, diagnoses as [and) carpal tunnel." "ADHD, HIV, Tr. 690. Dr. Pelz noted that Plaintiff's HIV was "[a)symptomatic," and that his ADHD was "[b) etter on Adderall," but that 1 Plaintiff still had The record contains an additional record from Dr. Pelz arguably meeting the criteria for being considered medical testimony. Tr. 1103. Plaintiff, however, does not argue the ALJ erroneously rejected this opinion. 15 - OPINION AND ORDER memory problems and "distractibility." Tr. 690. In response to whether Plaintiff's disabilities substantially affected any major life activities, Pelz Dr. Pelz wrote "yes - learning." circled Plaintiff's that concentration, multi-tasking, and processing Dr. affected conditions Tr. 691. his Tr. 691. speed. Accordingly, Dr. Pelz opined Plaintiff would require "extra time to complete work." Tr. 691. Dr. Choi listed "neck pain, low back pain, Tr. neuropathy" as Plaintiff's diagnoses. Plaintiff's onset date as January 29, [and] peripheral 692. 2008, Dr. Choi listed and circled that Plaintiff's conditions affect major life activities without further specification. Tr. Dr. 693. conditions cause chronic pain, Choi circled fatigue, his endurance and flexibility. Tr. not recommend any accommodations. that Plaintiff's and weakness, and affect 693. Dr. Choi, however, did Tr. 693. Dr. Curtin listed Plaintiff's diagnoses as HIV, carpal tunnel, fibromyalgia, neuropathy, and ADHD. Tr. 694. Dr. Curtin noted that Plaintiff's HIV was asymptomatic and his ADHD was "improved with [medication]." Tr. 694. conditions his affect Dr. Curtin circled that Plaintiff's abilities to learn as well as his concentration, multi-tasking, and processing speed, and cause him chronic pain and weakness. Tr. recommended receive that Plaintiff "[a]bility to change positions." 16 - OPINION AND ORDER 695. Accordingly, "[e]xtra Tr. 695. time" Dr. Curtin and the The record contains an additional letter submitted in relation to school accommodations. letter, Dr. recommended Curtin noted Plaintiff be Plaintiff's Dr. Tr. 933. Tr. In that of ADHD and time for 933. diagnosis Curtin "additional/prolonged given completion of his testing." from Dr. Curtin estimated that Plaintiff would require double the typical time for testing. 933. Finally, Dr. Curtin noted Plaintiff would also Tr. require additional time on account of his carpal tunnel syndrome, which would require Plaintiff to "take breaks from his penmanship." Tr. 933. The ALJ gave these opinions some, but not great weight, because educational accommodations do not directly correlate to possible vocational limitations, the record indicates Plaintiff's carpal tunnel and ADHD improved with treatment, and the accommodations were inconsistent with Plaintiff's activities· of daily living. Tr. 21. To the extent they were inconsistent with the RFC, these opinions were contradicted by, among other opinions, Dr. Brewster's Joshua J. Boyd, examining opinion and the Psy. D. Tr. 602-12, reviewing opinion of 831-33. Thus, the ALJ was required to cite specific and legitimate reasons to reject the school-accommodation opinions. I conclude the ALJ did so. The ALJ is correct that academic accommodations do not, in many circumstances, easily translate to workplace limitations. In this instance, this is particularly true with the accommodations 17 - OPINION AND ORDER for extra time with assignments and testing, as workplace activities are inherently different from educational assignments and tests. Notably, the RFC contains a very significant limitation of Plaintiff to "entry-level work consisting of simple, step instructions." differences limitations Tr. in academic by accommodations the between cited Especially 16. this ALJ, light of the and workplace is reasonably limitation consistent with the medical testimony. to 2Ｑｾ＠ See Stubbs-Danielson, 539 F.3d at 1174. As discussed above, the ALJ also reasonably noted that Plaintiff's carpal tunnel syndrome and ADHD improved after surgery and medication, Plaintiff Finally, respectively. required an accommodation Dr. to Curtin' s permit him note that to change positions is inconsistent with Plaintiff's reports of activities of daily living, including Plaintiff's report that he spent a "weekend hunched over books and scribbling out a term paper." ALJ properly noted that inconsistent with The the school-accommodation opinions were Plaintiff's conclude these reasons, Tr. 865. activities taken together, of daily living. I constitute specific and legitimate reasons to reject the opinions of Drs. Pelz, Choi, and Curtin. B. Dr. Schwartz Plaintiff next Schwartz's opinion. argues the ALJ erred in rejecting Dr. Dr. Schwartz noted that Plaintiff demonstrated 18 - OPINION AND ORDER "agitated depression," impulsivity, and "angry acting out." 785. his Tr. Dr. Schwartz noted that Plaintiff had significantly improved impulse Schwartz control and relationship skills. Tr. 786. Dr. that Plaintiff's activities of daily living vary ｲ･ｰｯｾｴ､＠ greatly based on Plaintiff's mood and symptoms, but were "usually adequate." Tr. 786. As to social functioning, Dr. Schwartz opined Plaintiff had "[l]imited ability" and was "inconsistent." Tr. 786. With respect to Plaintiff's concentration, persistence, and pace abilities, Dr. Schwartz opined Plaintiff has "some function" unless triggered. Tr. 787. Dr. Schwartz also opined, however, that Plaintiff has a "[h]istory of inability to adjust to work [and] home stressors over time such that cont[inued] employment [is] not feasible." Tr. 787. Although Dr. Schwartz completed the report on February 20, 2009, his last clinical encounter with Plaintiff was January 31, 2008. Tr. 787. The ALJ rejected Dr. Schwartz's opinion because he gave no specific vocational limitations, between the time Dr. Schwartz more than one year had elapsed last saw Plaintiff and when he submitted his opinion, Plaintiff showed significant improvement on Adder all, and Dr. Schwartz's Plaintiff's daily activities. contradicted by the opinion Tr. 22. opinion of Dr. inconsistent with Dr. Schwartz's opinion was Boyd in which he minimal limitations in social functioning. 19 - OPINION AND ORDER was Tr. 830-32. assigned Thus, the ALJ was required to cite specific and legitimate reasons to reject Dr. Schwartz's opinion. I conclude the ALJ did so. The ALJ's rejection of Dr. Schwartz's opinion because of the gap between treatment and submission of the opinion and Plaintiff's improvement on Adderall is particularly convincing. October 20, but a Indeed, on 2008, after Dr. Schwartz finished treating Plaintiff few months before Dr. Schwartz's opinion, Dr. Pelz noted Plaintiff "made numerous important gains over the last year or so" and that Plaintiff's Adderall. clinical appears Tr. 954. functionality Thus, encounter with to have been "improved significantly" the year between Dr. on Schwartz's last Plaintiff and the date of the opinion particularly significant and provides a convincing reason to reject Dr. Schwartz's opinion. The ALJ was also correct that Plaintiff's reported activities of daily living were inconsistent with Plaintiff's activities of daily living. Indeed, in Plaintiff's Adult Function Report, reported significant social interaction with his family. 68. he Tr. 260- While there are references in the record to difficulties in Plaintiff's relationship with his partner, those references become sparse after Plaintiff's cessation of methamphetamine. Otherwise, the,ALJ could reasonably find that Plaintiff's activities of daily living, including daily contact with local family, traveling to California to visit his son, and attending school multiple days per week, indicate Plaintiff was capable of somewhat limited social 20 - OPINION AND ORDER functioning as provided in the RFC. I conclude the ALJ cited Tr. 260-68, 976. specific and Accordingly, legitimate reasons to purposes in discount Dr. Schwartz's opinion. C. Dr. Angeles Dr. Angeles evaluated Plaintiff for treatment relation to his neck and back pain. Tr. 1172. After exam, Dr. Angeles opined Plaintiff "mainly has axial neck pain with left upper extremity radiculopathy," and reported Plaintiff's "pain is to the point that he is unable to obtain work or perform daily household activities." Tr. 1175. As to the duration of the symptoms, Dr. Angeles reported that Plaintiff's "neck and thoracic pain have been occurring for 7 years now." noted Plaintiff's cervical spine MRI Tr. 1172. dated Dr. Angeles March 7, demonstrated "multilevel spondylosis and disc degeneration." 2011, Tr. 1175. The ALJ rejected Dr. Angeles's opinion because it "appears to be a recitation of the claimant's subjective complaints rather than an opinion regarding functional limitations." Tr. 21. Indeed, Dr. Angeles did not opine on Plaintiff's functional limitations or the severity of Plaintiff's back impairments in any detail aside from her statement that Plaintiff's pain precludes him from obtaining work and daily household activities. Tr. 1175. In this respect, the ALJ is correct that Dr. Angeles's opinion appears to have been based on Plaintiff's discredited subjective reporting. 21 - OPINION AND ORDER Notably, the report that Plaintiff is precluded from performance of daily household activities is inconsistent with several reports discussed by the ALJ Plaintiff's mentioning throughout pain was Plaintiff the record, "improved" raking for or including "well-controlled," "several hours," transmission, and "moving furniture boxes around." 938, 1147, 1187. reports that notes carrying a Tr. 423, 923, Accordingly, reliance on Plaintiff's subjective symptom reporting is a compelling reason to reject Dr. Angeles's opinion. The ALJ did not err in weighing Dr. Angeles's testimony. D. Dr. Workman Finally, Plaintiff argues that the Commissioner's failure to discuss Dr. Workman's substantial evidence. opinion deprives the ALJ' s decision of Dr. Workman's opinion was submitted to the Appeals Council after the ALJ issued his decision. Tr. 4, 1181. When evidence is submitted for the first time to - and considered by - the Appeals Council, the court asks "whether, in light of the record as a whole, the ALJ's decision was supported by substantial evidence." Brewes v. Comm'r Soc. Sec. Admin., 682 F.3d 1157, 1163 (9th Cir. 2012). In her opinion, Dr. Workman noted Plaintiff was being treated for "chronic neck pain, neuropathic pain, and fibromyalgia." 1181. Tr. Dr. Workman opined Plaintiff "is currently debilitated by these conditions and is seeking to further his education doing studies four days a week." 22 - OPINION AND ORDER Tr. 1181. As a result, Dr. Workman wrote "it is thus my recommendation that during the time that he is studying, due to his debilitating pain from the above conditions, that he refrain from other physicai activity, which may be work related and cause progression of his symptoms." Viewing opinion the does evidence. record not As as deprive noted, the a whole, the I ALJ's ALJ' s Tr. 1181. conclude decision finding that Dr. of Workman's substantial Plaintiff's pain symptoms were not as severe as alleged is supported by considerable evidence in the record. In addition, Plaintiff pain, is limited by Dr. ascribe any functional limitations. aside from reporting that Workman's opinion does not Finally, Dr. Workman's opinion only speaks to Plaintiff's ability to work while in school four days per week, a standard of disability that differs considerably from that which the Commissioner applies. Thus, Dr. Workman's opinion does not necessitate remand to the Commissioner for further proceedings. In sum, I conclude the ALJ cited sufficient discredit to varying degrees the opinions Curtin, Schwartz, and Angeles. Drs. Pelz, to Choi, In addition, I find Dr. Workman's opinion does not deprive the ALJ' s substantial evidence. of reasons decision of the support of The ALJ appropriately weighed the medical testimony and permissibly incorporated the functional limitations contained therein into the RFC. Ill 23 - OPINION AND ORDER CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, the Commissioner's decision is AFFIRMED. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED this ;z..f day of October, 2014. Malcolm F. Marsh United States District Judge 24 - OPINION AND ORDER

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.