is of disability the person was her ability to drive her daughter to school they l j said that this activity showed that she could concentrate and pay attention well enough to sustain work activity because driving requires extensive attention and concentration but this where does testimony was that she only is able to engage in this activity once or twice a week and she's having the day she's feeling well it's our position that the ability to to drive a car to drive a child to school once or twice a week is does not demonstrate that miss ware to has the ability to concentrate on work activity for eight hours a day forty hours a week as would be consistent with full time work ok and one of the next things that the aylesbury light on was her ability to do household activities like loading the dishwasher and they all day said that her ability to do these activities that in a home setting indicated that she was not as limited as she but if we go back to miss ware just testimony her testimony was not that her impairments are so debilitating keeping never have any type of activity that she's in bed all day long that's not what she testified he stated that she can be active for a bit of minutes ten to fifteen minutes on her good days you know been a door to let the dog out  he can load the dishwasher she can occasionally drive her daughter to school but when she has an attack of her migraine heard her symptoms increase to the point where she needs to break she has to lie down so they all j's use of these activities on they're not if they're not actually inconsistent with  say she's you know they're treating physicians and say she really is limited you have some who say that they don't think she is and then she could perform affectively that the duties of the and you also have the plaintiffs and the plaintiffs husband who have you know stated that their disabilities are or are great but we have this conflicting testimony and they hail jaywalks through it how is this case any different n generally accepted large portions of the opinion i heard treating doctor that she needed the option to sit or stand at will and that she had greater limitations then but these not examining ying on giving any greater credibility than their testimony bad to the plaintiff well in many of these cases that would be our argument right here  the l j didn't actually appear to give more weight to the not examining doctor's opinions because they said that she could do light work and the ale j s decision was that she was limited said here and would need to sit or stand  training doctors opinions and in this case what we have doctor able it i think that's how you pronounce it but that she would need a ten minute break after every thirty minutes of stand which for the most part relied on the opinions of the tree knockers and her position is that the l j improperly failed to include parts of the opinions of the went out very quickly is that it's also our position that the past worked at the ale j found she could return to that of a hospital admitting where this is a sedentary job as described in the sedentary job such as hospital of many or your workstation would likely be set up so that your computer as is in a position where he would use it while seated  the b s testimony was that this job would be suitable as long as she could stay at the workstation when she needed to take her sit in stand breaks but she could still be in that she'd still be able to help  so let's imagine she's sitting at her desk at the hospital she has just now needed to take a break to stand out and at that point in time that's when a patient wants and needs to be admitted he needs to enter the patient's information into the computer but her workstation is set up for her to be seated so she he can't necessarily reach all the things that she needs to reach in order to help this this patient so it's our like symptoms twenty four hours a day seven days a week with paralysis constant pain and weakness speech difficulty vision changes mental confusion and concentration problems she testify that she can stand for fifteen minutes and can sit for fifteen minutes at a time and the problem with this record is that claimants allegations are simply not supported by the objective medical evidence or the other evidence in the are not supported by her daily activities which included taking care of her young daughter attending church regularly attending fellowship at friends houses meeting driving  if they were going on to that degree are very concerning symptoms so i think that's the main thrust of this case and i think they are j does a very detailed job explaining how claimants symptoms are seven days a week in other notes within the record the claimant reported that she was having two headaches a month so that an ala jay notes that inconsistency in the record is fairly benign the mental status examinations are mostly normal claimant is described as having excellent judgment and impulse control good insight intact memory normal attention and concentration fund of knowledge and i think that's important because part of her allegations are that she lived through her migraines experiences mental confusion but the objective evidence from her providers doesn't support that similarly her physical examinations of her knee after her surgery show that she's walking she's tohil walking she's jumping up and down she can partially squat s until less than sedentary work and took into account most of her alleged limitations with respect to her knee impairment and her obesity but even with that very limiting  found that the claimants past work as generally before md in the national economy that she could before and that it was still available and that directed of finding of non disability  how so what is driving what why is her ability to drive twice a week when she doesn't have a headache well what does that have to do with how does that show that she's able to go to  work i was going to address that point next my colleague mentioned assessment of the claimants activities of daily living and i think that there's a dispute there between hours a day seven days a week with paralysis mental confusion and comparing that and saying you know even someone who's driving her daughter two days a week to school probably would be getting behind  the wheel of a motor vehicle and that's a proper reason for rejecting subjective sometime testimony under molina how does that relate to the to the treating rejecting the treating well a claimant to claim its ability to drive even twice a week undermines dr ware and opinion that the claimant would need three dollars to four dollars breaks throughout the day every day opinion is not supported by her own treatment records but the claimant my green headaches are not supported throughout the record there's rd and they've been extensively worked  up and claimants the a l j points to the fact that the claimant is not consistently taking medications for migraine headaches she's not on a prophylactic medication which is a pretty normal course for migraine headaches she testified at her hearing that she takes a board of medication when her headaches get really bad but she doesn't take it regularly  also is seen by two other neurologists that kaiser who both recommend that she take a prophylactic migraine medicine  night and she reports that it improves the severity of her headaches so there's just when social security looks at migraine headaches and this is outlined a necessary nineteen  for they look it's very similar to a they look at seizure disorder they look at it hearings to medication documentation of the frequency and severity of the migraine headaches if there's a migraine headache log and you just don't see that work up for that kind of documentation in this record so i think that's that's probably the best reason is that dr burns opinion is is just not supported by the objective evidence are aired with respect to rejecting dr abel x postural limitations which we don't think they l j did air but should the quite find that that air would be harmless because the step for the job that the  twenty four hours a day looking at page fifty of the record which is the transcript of the hearing in which he actually said was that the aspect of her symptoms that is constant is the weakness and the feeling of pressure in the left side of her heart when she didn't say that she has the severe migraine symptoms twenty four hours a day she stated that that happens about ten times a month  anything in the medical records that reflects that she told the doctors she was having ten migraines a month i can't point to a specific instance richie stated that frequency but i would also i would like to i know that appear at the doctor's office every time you have is i'm just i'm just wondering whether that whether there's any doctor that she saw that she said i'm i'm having ten migraines a month of the doctor noted in the know it's just it's just up it's just a very large impressive number and if again that's a terrible burden for her to bear it just seems like that's the kind of things she would have told some doctor and somebody would have written it down because that's a lot did anybody write that down not to my knowledge or