the negative symptoms of schizophrenia i think along the way the able j also fails to follow social security rulings and regulation for guardian for determining severe apparent imperiled in particular he failed to mention social security ruling ninety six three p and this kind of like some older cases where the judge fails to mention the listing it's kind of a similar incidents it said difficult to determine if he actually  considered the appropriate criteria for determining a minute mr abuser either have or did have a severe impairment with life failing to mention the listing that gives him a lot of guidance doing that and i think also  the diagnostic criteria for schizophrenia are very relevant in this regard something that the social security administration has never really wanted to recognize is that in order for a diagnosis of a psychiatric condition to be given d s him for an d s m five both require some type of functional limitations you don't show up in psychiatry is office saying oh every i'm making lots of money i got a good job i get along with my wife and kids everything's fine i love my neighbors but every once in a while i feel depressed and then you get a diagnosis of major depression that's under the criteria of the d s m four and five that just wouldn't happen and  and with schizophrenia you have to have a markedly diminished level of functioning in either social functioning work functioning or self care which is the squat afaik now worth this is a bar on the severity of the impairment or well i just thought there was no impairment at all or well he he does recognize that the schizophrenia is a medically to terminal impairment and under the ruling and the regulations once you make that step you are supposed to consider the individual symptoms and their testimony at the hearing about those symptoms now in his summary he mentions several things that would indicate that mr muser schizophrenia was severe he says he had been having troubles concentrating he didn't have the energy to go to work basically he was sad and needed help from his parents a nd basically those types of things if considered in determining whether or not his impairment was severe basically point in the direction of him being severe and also as ninety six three p c s if the judge after assessing the impairment and considering the testimony can't decide one way or the other they're supposed to go ahead and proceed with the sequential evaluation well in this situation i think in large part due to a misunderstanding of the negative symptoms of schizophrenia he didn't do that the able jaded and didn't proceed with the evaluations so i think also it's pretty apparent as to is this court has repeatedly j does seem to misunderstand i think these these negative symptoms and it's part of a lot of people he says he's got mild the limitation concentration persistence or pace looking at the functional areas no d compensation he's looking at other things mild limitations social daily living he does acknowledge the insomnia that's a very constant complaint about this but he fails to recognize or consider that insomnia is often a very significant problem with schizophrenia and apply the appropriate set up standard of evidence in this case i mean the boilerplate in the what's problematic and since i don't find your testimony entirely credible which is an indication that in order to be found disabled i must find that your testimony is entirely credible well the as the sole skeered career ruling for a five point one c three says it's a preponderance and also in which was  a ruling that was in a political at this time ninety six ninety six seven p basically says you don't have to accept all of what a claimant say says or reject what all individual says you can pick and choose and you can make different determinations and basically again we're going back to the judge's summary of the testimony there are several things in there where he is having pretrial bills with  of segues into the able jail use failure to weigh the treating source opinion properly because with schizophrenia as the sources i cite my priest say basically you have to observe the schizophrenia person they oftentimes will express that they want to do things and they have certain desires but you when you observe their flat affect and their lack of expression that it supports the diagnosis and also we can indicate is an indication of the severity and also as i s basically with schizophrenia most people are looking for the psychotic episode but as a source as in the brief say basically those can typically be dealt with with anti psychotic medications the truly significant limiting part of schizophrenia is the negative symptoms there are things that could prevent schizophrenia from being able to hold help have relationships with people that were going to them from being able to leave their houses and work and  that's another thing basically i think is a problem with this situation the able j rejects treating psychiatry is dr rodent's opinion never acknowledges or discusses the factors  weighing in opinion doesn't doesn't know fifth that doctor wrote in was a treating psychiatry just doesn't discuss the treating relationship doesn't discuss the frequency of contact doctor in an eighteen month period saw him nine times  roughly approximately two wants every two months and then dr wrote and does complete this mental residual functional capacity assessment that the able j rejects that whole thing right yes and i think that's a combination of a lack of understanding of the negative symptoms of schizophrenia and also basically overlooking the doctor rotate rutan's notations of blinded effect difficulty sleeping problems with memory and concentration of cetera it would that's also a problem with him not acknowledging that doctor wrote and was a treating psychiatry specialist who under the regulations his opinion is supposed to be worth more weight so that's what i was going to ask you we've got a psychiatry is from one side of the tre and he didn't see that he might have been expressing things even on the phone there was one note where they said well he can do all these things but basically that's typical with the negative symptoms of schizophrenia schizo those types of people will express that they want to do things but they don't and his testimony and i think dr broken is no show in any of the opinion is in his r a c show he didn't you know he doesn't have the ability to go out and do these things yeah there as a normal person would and i think also the o j kind of overlooked basically the kind of sheltered environment that mr abuser lived he lived with his parents he had worked in the same place for sixteen years and it's pretty clear that due to which switching his normal medications to the generic and also increasing stress at work that his condition got worse and he ended up going to the hospital and started seeing doctor oh ok we're going to need to get may please the court counsel cynthia a freberg under half of acting commissioner of social security carolyn call th this is a case about a man who had schizophrenia for fourteen fifteen years and he was able to work with that he was receiving proper medication and treatment and he worked for fourteen or fifteen fifteen year so he's not claiming an onset date within that time he's claiming an onset date later after the medications are just rafted there's evidence from his treating physician in the record that he's no longer actually is faced with the choice of returning to work or being fired so it quits his job because he's not able to cope he says  discussed the treatment notes he although he didn't know if he was a treat is that we're treating psychiatry as he noted he was clearly aware that mr musa was going to him for mental health treatment that he was receiving treatment but he's misreading the treating records you know if you look at page nine of twelve of the chase opinion he's referring to  rodents mental residual functional capacity assessment the limitations and sustain concentration persistence social interacting in the l j things these findings are completely in contrast with the treating schizophrenia flat af ect inability to sleep inability to do things living forever with his parents in a very protected environment if the if the a a transparent consideration of the treating physician and had understood what kinds of evidence was there in the records i think this might have been different and then when you get non treating psych one person's a psychologist we don't even know who the other person was you could have been a lawyer for all i know but we have one psychologist who never sees this man it's seems to me strange that the governor didn't  least have somebody examine him and come up with an independent determination well again we submit that the l j properly did consider dr runs opinion what he misunderstood every word dr wrote and wrote no that's not a good consideration you can talk about it for a while but if he's talking about a negative symptoms remaining prominent remaining prominent that's at the top of time are not something to be thrilled about just doesn't give dr roans opinion any weight and i just wonder if the ale jay had said oh but he's the treating physician he's got this long period and this is his overall assessment why that gets trumped by somebody who's never looked at him well because the l j found that these treatment notes did not support doctor rowan's extreme opinion  d an extreme no i know he said that the why does he say that because your stand what negative symptoms are i don't know what the a l j i understood however the negative symptoms remaining prominent as noted and a single occasion and i guessed of two thousand and thirteen this the negative symptoms remaining prominent notation was not made prior to that in the previous visit why do you think he keeps diagnosing  mr muser with schizophrenia then well because mr meese or had schizophrenia and that a l j accepted the diagnosis this is not like the thomas case that mr yoko submitted schizophrenia but the problem then is that the able chase seems to be at the step two stage the a l j is looking to me as though he's doing a step for analysis and that's wrong of course at the step two phase the bar is not so high a impairment is not severe only if it's a slight abnormality has no more than a minimal effect that's jumps too far too fast really well the l j found that he did not have a sick severe impairment because he didn't have schizophrenia did not significantly limited him for twelve months  some kind of severe impairment but it doesn't need we don't know yet what the step for actually we don't even know about a listing that we don't know yet about what either step through or step five would be so do you think this court is wrong to call step two as a de minimus screening for groundless claims thomas against call them you know i don't think the court is as wrong and characterizing the step to standard a so why doesn't his cancer for any at least get him into the rest of the analysis which of course would have to happen i don't think that's an issue because the l j reasonably found that he was not he did not have a severe impairment for more than twelve months his magic his medication was changed to a generic form and new search testified that that's what caused his sleep problems which led to this period of time just does not meet the duration of requirement that he to muser hasn't shown that he had he was significantly limited in his abilities to perform basic work at activities  for zero four point one five to zero i don't think you find that twenty c a far and the a l j didn't say that was the reason he was finding that there was a lack force smaller roman numeral two if an individual does not have a severe medically determinable for full physical or mental impairment that meets the duration requirement for afford fifteen zero nine the agency will find him not disabled ok so since i am out of time if there are no further questions i will rest on my brief and ask this court to affirm the commissioner's decision all right thank you very much doctor in his middle r f c said that his patient dr mr muser had been suffering at the level described there and since feb twelfth of two thousand and twelve so and also from february of two thousand a twelve is your honor i think noted they are the diagnoses of schizophrenia and schizophrenia and differentiated and also weigh in response to the commissioner's argument there's at least six times where the a l j failed to mention