Task: Wrong Candidate Generation
Input (English): giving weight to or rejecting the statements of a treating physician. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1527(d)(2). Whether the ALJ gives great or small weight to the opinions of treating physicians, the ALJ must give good reasons for giving the opinions that weight. Holmstrom v. Massanari, 270 F.3d 715, 720 (8th Cir.2001). “The ALJ may discount or disregard such an opinion if other medical assessments are supported by superior medical evidence, or if the treating physician has offered inconsistent opinions.” Hogan v. Apfel, 239 F.3d 958, 961 (8th Cir.2001). Moreover, a treating physician’s opinion does not deserve controlling weight when it is nothing more than a conclusory statement. Piepgras v. Chater, 76 F.3d 233, 236 (8th Cir.1996). See also Thomas v. Sullivan, 928 F.2d 255, 259 (8th Cir.1991) (<HOLDING>). 1. Dr. Millea’s May, 22, 2005, Opinion Letter 
 Holding statements: (A) holding that a conclusory opinion may be rejected (B) holding that the weight given a treating physicians opinion is limited if the opinion consists only of conclusory statements (C) holding that where a treating physicians opinion is contradicted by a consulting physician the alj must explain on the record the reasons for rejecting the opinion of the treating physician (D) holding that remand was not required and that the aljs failure to mention treating physicians opinion was harmless error because the alj adopted the treating physicians recommendations (E) holding that a treating physicians opinion may be rejected if it is brief conclusory and unsupported by medical evidence
Output (English): holding that remand was not required and that the aljs failure to mention treating physicians opinion was harmless error because the alj adopted the treating physicians recommendations