Olson v. Commissioner Social Security Administration, No. 3:2014cv01117 - Document 24 (D. Or. 2015)
Court Description: OPINION AND ORDER. The ALJ did not error in evaluating Plaintiff's credibility or the lay witnesses' statements. Thus, the ALJ did not error in the evaluation of Plaintiff's RFC. Therefore, the Commissioner's decision is AFFIRMED. See formal OPINION AND ORDER. Signed on 7/22/2015 by Chief Judge Ann L. Aiken. (rh)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Olson v. Commissioner Social Security Administration Doc. 24 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON ANGELA LYNN OLSEN, Case No. 3:14-cv-01117-AA OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiff, v. CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant. AIKEN, Chief Judge: This action is brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) to obtain judicial review of the final decision of the Commissioner denying Benefits Plaintiff's (DIE) and applications Supplemental for Disability Security Income Insurance (SSI). Upon review, the Commissioner's decision is AFFIRMED. Background On September 17, 2010, Plaintiff protectively filed 1 - OPINION AND ORDER Dockets.Justia.com applications for disability date initially and Plaintiff a and SSI. of July 1, on Both 2 00 6. reconsideration. a Administrative issued DIB vocational Law Judge written filings The applications After expert (ALJ). decision (VE) finding a testified Shortly an onset were denied requesting hearing, before an thereafter, the ALJ Plaintiff was not that disabled as· of the alleged onset date. from the Appeals Council, alleged Plaintiff sought revie'"' which denied the request for review. Plaintiff then sought judicial review. Standard of Review The court must affirm the Commissioner's decision if it is based on proper legal standards and the findings by substantial F.2d 498, than a 501 mere reasonable evidence (9th conclusion." Cir. scintilla. mind in might Richardson the record. 1989). It Substantial means accept v. Hammock such as Perales, v. Bowen, evidence relevant adequate 402 are supported U.S. is "more evidence to 389, 879 as support 401 a a (1971) (citation and internal quotations omitted). The court must weigh "both the evidence [Commissioner's] 771, 772 (9th that supports conclusions." Cir. 1986). and Martinez Variable v. detracts from the 807 F.2d Heckler, interpretations of the evidence are insignificant if the Commissioner's interpretation is rational. Burch v. 2005) 2 - OPINION AND ORDER Barnhart, 400 F.3d 676, 679 (9th Cir. The initial establish (9th burden disability. Cir. 198 6) . of proof Howard To v. meet rests upon Heckler, this the 782 F.2d to 1484, 1486 claimant the burden, claimant must demonstrate an "inability to engage in any substantial gainful activity mental by reason of impairment continuous any medically which period of can not be less determinable expected... than 12 physical to last months." 42 or for a U.S.C. § 423(d) (1) (A). Discussion Plaintiff ALJ the discounting Plaintiff's testimony; witness evidence statements; into Commissioner the argues and 3) erred 2) failing by: improperly discounting lay to incorporate residual that ALJ's the above capacity (RFC) The functional the improperly 1) decision is supported by legally sufficient reasons and that this Court should affirm the Commissioner's decision. I. The ALJ' s Evaluation of Plaintiff's Credibility Plaintiff first contends that the ALJ improperly evaluated her testimony. impairment, testimony as Once a claimant produces medical evidence of an the to Commissioner the convincing reasons. Cir. to 1998). use may severity of Reddick v. discredit symptoms Chater, 157 In making these determinations, ordinary 3 - OPINION AND ORDER techniques used in the only with F.3d 715, claimant's clear and 722 (9th the ALJ is allowed the evaluation of credibility. Molina 2012). example, For v. "[i]f substantial part of performance work of setting, sufficient Comm' r. 1999). [her] physical a to Astrue, specific a that finding is Sec. Admin., also consider are as claimant's Soc. claimant testimony, 1104, 1112 able (9th to Cir. spend a day engaged in pursuits involving the ALJ may The F.3d claimant functions discredit of the a 674 169 to transferable this fact inconsistent 600 or a may be Morgan allegations." F. 3d 595, to v. (9th Cir. unexplained failure to follow a course of treatment or recommendations of doctors, evidence of self-limiting behaviors, and a claimant's work history. See Thomas v. Barnhart, 278 F.3d 947, 959 (9th Cir. 2002); see Molina, 674 F. 3d at 1112. Plaintiff alleges that she has severe limitations such as limited mobility in her shoulder, a lack of ability to walk or sit for extended periods of time, diabetes, allow her to interact extreme migraines, with people without and back and abdomen PTSD that does not becoming spasms. Tr. 110, 112-13, 116-18, 120-22. Due to these impairments, claims she is disabled. adverse credibility between her alleged activities; 2) her doctor; and 3) irritated, 106, 108, Plaintiff The ALJ provided three reasons for his finding. They functional are: 1) limitations inconsistencies and her daily Plaintiff's lack of candor and truthfulness with the conservative treatment provided to treat 4 - OPINION AND ORDER her medical issues. Tr. 33-34. I find that the ALJ provided legally sufficient reasons for his credibility evaluation. The record supports the ALJ' s several statements activities. that For example, finding that Plaintiff made with inconsistent are her daily the ALJ noted that Plaintiff was able to perform household chores such as laundry, washing the dishes, and vacuuming. Tr. 33, 98-101. Additionally, the ALJ cited activities in which the Plaintiff interacts with people, such as shopping, Tr. 33, talking on the phone and visiting friends and family. 98-99, 105. The ALJ noted that Plaintiff spends time with her long-term boyfriend and neighbor everyday and that they go out to dinner occasionally. Tr. 99, 104. Finally, the ALJ noted that Plaintiff was able to care for her young daughter by driving her to school, dressing her, and taking care of her at night for much of the time. Tr. 33, 100, 102, 401. These activities are inconsistent with the severity of the limitations Plaintiff alleges. For example, Plaintiff alleges that she has severe deliberating migraines four to five times a week that last for days at a time, during which she lays in the fetal position pillows. Tr. activities and covers 110-111, of basic 114. her ears and eyes with towels and This is inconsistent with her daily cooking, cleaning, and child rearing. Plaintiff also alleges, for example, that her PTSD causes her to be closed off, angry, 5 - OPINION AND ORDER depressed, and unable to interact with people 121. such as However, supervisors or co-v.,rorkers. the severity of the store, with going to this Tr. 74-75, impairment is 116, inconsistent interacting with family and seeing her boyfriend and neighbor daily, 91, friends, and going to dinner in public places. Second, Plaintiff the was record dishonest treating doctor, supports in her a witness or claimant Dr. that Taycher, truthfulness. (9th Cir. 2 005) . testimony, To Taycher Burch rebut v. the of may evaluate credibility evaluation, Barnhart, the ALJ' s ALJ 400 finding, specifically noted that F.3d 676, Taycher Dr. credibility; alternative Dr. did not Taycher medication; doubt understood and Dr. 680 Plaintiff argues Plaintiff had always been responsible with her narcotic medication in the past, 770; her In determining the credibility ordinary techniques including Dr. to finding regarding marijuana use when she had agreed to testimony using that ALJ's reports a narcotic contract. Tr. 34, 770. of the Plaintiff's disability tr. or why Plaintiff would seek Taycher continued prescribing the medication. Pl. Reply Br. 4. The record indicates that Dr. Taycher "strongly advised" Plaintiff that her continued use of marijuana would force her to stop prescribing narcotics to Plaintiff. the medical records do not reflect Dr. Plaintiff's credibility, 6 - OPINION AND ORDER or her See Tr. 770. Granted, Taycher' s opinion about acquiescence with Plaintiff's marijuana use. under See id. medication a Rather, the record reflects while marijuana disallowing agreement that use, Plaintiff did not disclose marijuana use to her doctor. See id. While this evidence may be subject to varying interpretations, this Court cannot find the ALJ's finding to be unreasonable. Finally, the record the supports ALJ' s finding Plaintiff received minimal and conservative treatment. that Tr. 33. Evidence of conservative treatment iS sufficient grounds f6r an ALJ to F. 3d discount 7 42, initial 7 51 a claimant's (9th complaint Cir. testimony. 2007) . of back pain Parra The ALJ noted in August and Vicodin, icing her back. Tr. As true, that 4 81 since her Plaintiff 2010, continued on a regimen of narcotic treatment, and v. has including flexeril 33. The ALJ noted additional instances of medication for treatment of nausea and vomiting. used an Tr. 33. inhaler Further, for her the ALJ noted that while asthma, her increased coughing wheezing was treated by more prescriptions. Tr. despite continuing, the pain in her back and abdomen Plaintiff 33-34. and Finally, the ALJ noted only one time in which Plaintiff received treatment other than prescriptions. That instance was a cystectomy in May, 2012, to treat endometriosis. Tr. 34. 1 Thus, because the ALJ provided Plaintiff argues that the ALJ improperly considered her inability to pay out of pocket. However, the ALJ did not question Plaintiff's credibility on grounds that she did not seek or undergo aggressive treatments. Rather, The ALJ simply 7 - OPINION AND ORDER clear and convincing reasons supported by the record, this Court upholds the ALJ's evaluation of Plaintiff's credibility. II. The ALJ's Evaluation of Witness Statements Plaintiff reasons to witnesses. also argues discredit The ALJ the the ALJ failed statements stated that the to of provide lay witness germane several statements law "are considered credible to the extent reports of what has been seen and heard are accurate." Tr. 34-35. The ALJ also added, however, that the claimant's daily activities, treating medical evidence, and conservative medical treatment do not show she is as limited as the witnesses alleged. Tr. 34-35. I agree. For example, Plaintiff's mother wrote that she cares for Plaintiff's child two to four days a week and drops her back off at night so she can go to school in the morning. also wrote that stooping." Tr. want to Plaintiff 4 4 7. interact has Finally, with trouble "standing, she wrote that others. Tr. Tr. 4 4 7. 44 7. bending, She or Plaintiff does not Similarly, Plaintiff's boyfriend wrote that Plaintiff began having pain in her hip and back that became Plaintiff's Plaintiff chores in and neighbor progressively wrote vacuuming, caring for that mopping, worse. twice laundry, Plaintiff's pet. Tr. 450. weekly she and other Tr. 451. Finally, assists household The ALJ noted that the treatments received and recommended by her treating physicians were conservative. See generally tr. 33-34. 8 - OPINION AND ORDER indicated that evaluation, these and the statements RFC are reflects considered within the this through RFC limitations in functional movements and public contact. However, the lay witnesses also provide opinions that do not stem from their observations or are otherwise not supported by the record. For example, Plaintiff's mother states that Plaintiff is bed ridden for two to three days at a time, the ALJ found Tr. 44 7, 401. inconsistent with Plaintiff's daily which activities. Some of Plaintiff's boyfriend's statements do not relate to Plaintiff's impairments but, instead, to a weakening emotional bond between Plaintiff and himself. Tr. Plaintiff's Plaintiff neighbor broadly perform simple daily tasks, own daily activities. Tr. states that 450. Finally, cannot which is counter to the Plaintiff's 98-101, 401, 451. Thus, the ALJ did not err in the evaluation of law witness statements. III. The ALJ's Evaluation RFC In arguing that the ALJ's evaluation of Plaintif£'s RFC was error, Plaintiff restates her arguments above. A court will affirm an ALJ's evaluation of Plaintiff's RFC if the ALJ applied proper legal substantial standards evidence F.3d 1211, 1217 in and their the record. decision is Bayliss v. supported Barnhart, by 427 (9th Cir. 2005). As found above, the ALJ applied the proper legal standards in rejecting portions of Plaintiff's allegations the law witness statements. 9 - OPINION AND ORDER Further, support the substantial evidence exists within the record to ALJ' s assessment, RFC evaluation. concluding that The ALJ cited Plaintiff Kehrli' s limit should Dr. overhead reaching, only occasionally stoop, crawl and crouch, among other things. Tr. 34, 191-94, 204-07. Additionally, Plaintiff must avoid exposure to only occasional public contact, placed other restrictions on the ALJ found that respiratory irritants, have and have a stand/sit option and activities that impact the back, like climbing latters, stairs and ramps. Tr. 32. Thus, the ALJ's RFC considers Plaintiff's lower back limitations and her history of respiratory problems and use of inhalers. 7 69. and Thus, his Tr. 9 6, because the ALJ applied the proper legal opinion is supported by substantial 510, 7 53, standards evidence in the record, the ALJ's evaluation of the RFC is affirmed. Conclusioh The.ALJ did not error in evaluating Plaintiff's credibility or the lay witnesses' statements. Thus, the ALJ did not error in the evaluation of Plaintiff's RFC. Therefore, the Commissioner's decision is AFFIRMED. IT IS SO ORDERED. '1..1 Dated this pD . of July, 2015. Ann Aiken U.S. District Judge 10. 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.
