Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ared-1_15-cv-00011/USCOURTS-ared-1_15-cv-00011-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 864
Nature of Suit: Social Security - SSID Title XVI
Cause of Action: 42:405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID)

---

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS

NORTHERN DIVISION

LORA D. HAMMAN PLAINTIFF

v. No. 1:15CV00011-JLH-JJV

CAROLYN W. COLVIN,

ACTING COMMISSIONER,

SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION DEFENDANT

RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION

Instructions

The following recommended disposition was sent to U.S. District Judge J. Leon

Holmes. A party to this dispute may file written objections to this recommendation. An

objection must be specific and state the factual and/or legal basis for the objection. An

objection to a factual finding must identify the finding and the evidence supporting the

objection. Objections must be filed with the clerk of the court no later than 14 days from

the date of this recommendation.1 The objecting party must serve the opposing party with

a copy of an objection. Failing to object within 14 days waives the right to appeal questions

of fact.2

If no objections are filed, Judge Holmes may adopt the recommended disposition

without independently reviewing all of the record evidence.

1

28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b).

2Griffini v. Mitchell, 31 F.3d 690, 692 (8th Cir. 1994) (failure to file objections waives

right to de novo review and to appeal magistrate judge’s findings of fact).

Case 1:15-cv-00011-JLH Document 21 Filed 11/10/15 Page 1 of 9
Recommended Disposition

Lora Hamman seeks judicial review of the denial of her application for disability

insurance benefits.3

In the past, Ms. Hamman worked as a registered nurse,4

 but she left

her nursing job because of domestic and job stress.5She then worked as a part-time

substitute mail carrier until her employer’s contract expired.6

She claims she has been

disabled since she stopped working. She bases disability on fibromyalgia, irritable bowel

syndrome, gastritis, depression, anxiety, a fast heart rate, and thyroid nodules.7

The Commissioner’s decision. After considering the application, the

Administrative Law Judge (ALJ ) identified “severe” impairments in the form of major

depressive disorder, generalized anxiety disorder, somatoform disorder, personality

disorder, history of fibromyalgia, and possible small fiber neuropathy.8 The ALJ

determined she maintained the residual functional capacity to perform a reduced range of

sedentary work despite her impairments.9 The ALJ assessed that Ms. Hamman can no

3

SSA record at p. 132 (applying on Mar. 28, 2012 and alleging disability beginning

Aug. 31, 2008).

4

Id. at pp. 165 & 194.

5

Id. at p. 40 (testifying that she stopped nursing due to emotional stress from her

home life and a lot of stress from the job place).

6

Id. at pp. 40 & 205.

7

Id. at p. 151.

8

Id. at p. 16.

9

Id. at p. 18.

2

Case 1:15-cv-00011-JLH Document 21 Filed 11/10/15 Page 2 of 9
longer work as a registered nurse,10

but using the services of a vocational expert, identified

jobs she can perform despite her impairments.11 The ALJ therefore concluded Ms.

Hamman is not disabled and denied the application.12

After the Appeals Council denied review,13the ALJ’s decision became the

Commissioner’s final decision forthe purpose of judicial review.14 Ms. Hamman filed this

case to challenge the decision.15

Ms. Hamman’s arguments for reversal. Ms. Hamman challenges the evaluation of

her credibility, and says theALJ improperly rejected hertreating-physician’s opinions. She

also argues that substantial evidence does not support the ALJ’s decision.16

Applicable legal principles. When reviewing a decision denying an application for

disability insurance benefits, the court must determine whether substantial evidence

10

Id. at p. 23.

11

Id. at p. 24.

12

Id. at p. 25.

13

Id. at p. 1.

14

See Anderson v. Sullivan, 959 F.2d 690, 692 (8th Cir. 1992) (stating that “the Social

Security Act precludes general federal subject matter jurisdiction until administrative

remedies have been exhausted” and explaining that the Commissioner’s appeal procedure

permits claimants to appeal only final decisions).

15Docket entry # 1.

16Docket entry #s 11 & 17.

3

Case 1:15-cv-00011-JLH Document 21 Filed 11/10/15 Page 3 of 9
supports the decision and whether the ALJ made a legal error.

17

For substantial evidence

to exist, a reasonable mind must accept the evidence as adequate to support the

determination that Ms. Hamman can perform a reduced range of sedentary work.18

Sedentary work “involves lifting no more than 10 pounds at a time and occasionally lifting

or carrying articles like docket files, ledgers, and small tools.”19

The ALJ placed many limitations on sedentary work:

(1) occasional pushing, pulling, bending, stooping, crouching, squatting,

kneeling, crawling, and stair climbing;

(2) no heights, hazardous unprotected moving equipment, temperature

extremes,humidity,dust,fumes,poorventilation, extreme noise or vibration;

(3) no high stress jobs such as fast paced jobs or jobs requiring the worker to

meet strict and explicit quotas, deadlines, or schedules, and no jobs requiring

the worker to cope with frequent or unusual changes in the work setting;

(4) no jobs requiring sustained high level concentration such as sustained

attention to detail; and

(5)workinvolving no personal interaction with the public or close interaction

17

See 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) (requiring the district court to determine whether the

Commissioner’s findings are supported by substantial evidence and whether the

Commissioner conformed with applicable regulations); Long v. Chater, 108 F.3d 185, 187

(8th Cir. 1997) (“We will uphold the Commissioner’s decision to deny an applicant

disability benefits if the decision is not based on legal error and if there is substantial

evidence in the record as a whole to support the conclusion that the claimant was not

disabled.”).

18Britton v. Sullivan, 908 F.2d 328, 330 (8th Cir. 1990) (“Substantial evidence ‘means

such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a

conclusion.’”).

19

20 C.F.R. § 404.1567(a).

4

Case 1:15-cv-00011-JLH Document 21 Filed 11/10/15 Page 4 of 9
with coworkers, and requiring incidental contact with supervisors.

The question before the Court is whether a reasonable mind will accept the evidence as

adequate to show Ms. Hamman can work within these parameters. After careful review

of the entire record, a reasonable mind will accept the evidence as adequate for the

following reasons: 

1. The medical evidence supports a finding Ms. Hamman is capable of

performing sedentary work. A claimant must prove disability with medical evidence;

subjective complaints are not enough to prove disability.20 Much of Plaintiff’s medical

evidence only documents her subjective complaints. And Ms. Hamman claims she has

been disabled since August 2008, but she sought little medical treatment until December

2010. At that time, she complained about numerous symptoms flowing from domestic

20

42 U.S.C. § 423 (d)(5)(A) (“An individual’s statement as to pain or other symptoms

shall not alone be conclusive evidence of disability...; there must be medical signs and

findings, established by medically acceptable clinical or laboratory diagnostic techniques,

which show the existence of a medical impairment...which could reasonably be expected

to produce the pain or other symptoms alleged and which...would lead to a conclusion

that the individual is under a disability”); 20 C.F.R. § 404.1508 (“A physical or mental

impairment must be established by medical evidence consisting of signs, symptoms, and

laboratory findings, not only by your statement of symptoms.”); 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529

(“[S]tatements about your pain or other symptoms will not alone establish that you are

disabled; there must be medical signs and laboratory findings which show that you have

a medical impairment(s) which could reasonably be expected to produce the pain or other

symptoms alleged and which, when considered with all of the other evidence (including

statements about the intensity and persistence of your pain or other symptoms which may

reasonably be accepted as consistent with the medical signs and laboratory findings),

would lead to a conclusion that you are disabled.”).

5

Case 1:15-cv-00011-JLH Document 21 Filed 11/10/15 Page 5 of 9
stress.21 Later, she saw many specialists22

and other medical providers, and underwent

numerous diagnostic tests, but withnegativemedicalfindings.

23 More importantly, doctors

recommended activity exceeding sedentary work,24and associated complaints of physical

symptoms to psychological factors.25

21

SSA record at p. 257 (complaining during Dec. 14, 2010 well woman exam about

“a list of multiple complaints including fatigue, long standing episodes of depression”),

p. 260 (complaining on Jan. 7, 2011 about being tired all the time, not sleeping at night,

severe mood swings priorto menstruation, and multiple family stressors); p. 263 (reporting

palpitations and reflux on Mar. 7, 2011), p. 265 (complaining on Mar. 14, 2011 about nausea

and gastrointestinal symptoms associated with stress and anxiety) & p. 267 (reporting

worsening abdominal pain and body aches on Mar. 25, 2011).

22

Id. at p. 274 (gastroenterologist), p. 439 (cardiologist), p. 459 (neurologist), p. 466

(pulmonologist), p. 483 (another gastroenterologist), p. 605 (second neurologist), p. 615

(third neurologist) & p. 651 (rheumatologist).

23

Id. at p. 309 (negative Holter monitor report), p. 312 (negative ultrasound of

abdomen), p. 270 (EKG with no acute findings), p. 327 (normal hepatobiliary scan, no sign

of bile leak or obstruction), p. 336 (normal endoscopic gastroduodenoscopy), p. 442 (Holter

showed no sign of structural orischemic heart disease, normal myoview and echo), p. 280

(negative CT scan of abdomen),p. 278 (esophagogastroduodenoscopyshowingnon-erosive

gastritis), p. 377 (neg CT of chest) & p. 484 (normal gastric emptying study, normal biopsy

of small bowel is normal, no evidence of H pylori).

24

Id. at p. 603 (“I strongly encouraged her to participate in low impact exercise such

as brisk walking, swimming or bicycle riding.”) & p. 620 (“Instructed to participate in

physical activity on a regular basis to maintain overall health.”). 

25

Id. at pp. 459-62 (Apr. 24, 2012: neurology consult for shortness of breath, normal

neurological examination suggesting no focal injury or problem, her symptoms simulate

more of a depressive illness, recommend psychotherapy), pp. 483-84 (May 21, 2012:

gastroenterology consult for abdominal pain, constipation, nausea, vomiting and

abdominal bloating, her symptoms are likely somatic manifestations of underlying

psychiatric problems,it is possible gastrointestinal symptoms will improve with resolution

of depression, recommend psychiatrist to manage mental illness), pp. 602-03 (Feb. 14, 2013:

another neurology consult, she brought two hand-written pages of symptoms, diagnostic

6

Case 1:15-cv-00011-JLH Document 21 Filed 11/10/15 Page 6 of 9
2. The ALJ properly discounted the treating-physician medical statements. Ms.

Hamman presented two medical statements to prove she is disabled: one from a

chiropractic neurologist26and anotherfrom a neurologist who focuses on autoimmune and

inflammatory disorders of the central and peripheral nervous system.27 Both statements

reported disabling physical limitations. The ALJ gave the statements little weight. Ms.

Hamman claims that the ALJ should have given the statements controlling weight, or at

least contacted the authors for more information.

The Commissioner’s rules instruct the ALJ to give a treating-physician’s medical

opinion controlling weight if it “is well-supported and not inconsistent with the other

substantial evidence in the case record.”28 The ALJ must seek clarifying statements from

a treating physician if a crucial issue is undeveloped.29 Treating-physician opinions are

entitled to special weight, but they do not automatically control because the record must

testing was negative, doctor explained that a percentage of her symptoms can be attributed

to small fiber neuropathy, but mood and anxiety are also playing a role, doctor explained

that life hardening is a proven strategy for improving functioning and conditioning) &

pp. 701-04 (Aug. 19, 2013: second visit with new family practice doctor, she is notwilling

to try recommended medication, she is not willing to go to counseling and remains fixated

on previous surgery as source of health problems, cognitive behavioral therapy would be

helpful).

26

Id. at pp. 690-91.

27

Id. at pp. 559-61.

28

SSR 96-2p, Pol’y Interpretation Ruling Titles II & XVI, Giving Controlling Weight to

Treating Source Med. Opinions.

29Vossen v. Astrue, 612 F.3d 1011, 1016 (8th Cir. 2010).

7

Case 1:15-cv-00011-JLH Document 21 Filed 11/10/15 Page 7 of 9
be evaluated as a whole.30

The record as a whole shows no disabling physical symptoms. Ms. Hamman has

seen many medical providers since December 2010, but no medical provider documented

medical findings substantiating numerous physical complaints. The record addresses all

crucial issues. So the ALJ properly discounted the medical statements as unsupported.

3. Substantial evidence supports the ALJ’s credibility evaluation. The ALJ

observed, “The medical evidence of record is inconsistent with the claimant’s complaints

of severe pain throughout her body, numbness, shortness of breath, exhaustion, rapid

heartbeat, stomach pain with nausea and dizziness requiring her to lie down during the

day for hours, and to spend much of her day in the bathroom.” 31 The ALJ could properly

discount her credibility given the disparity between Ms. Hamman’s allegations and the

medical evidence. In addition, Ms. Hamman suggested other motivation for seeking

disability insurance benefits.32 Therefore, the ALJ did not errin evaluating Ms. Hamman’s

credibility.

Conclusion

A reasonable mind will accept the evidence as adequate to support the

30Bentley v. Shalala, 52 F.3d 784, 785-86 (8th Cir. 1995).

31

SSA record at p. 22.

32

Id. at p. 677 (very angry at husband, wants to get him into trouble, really wants to

leave husband), p. 676 (she really wants to get away from husband), p. 533 (she wants to

leave husband)& p. 658 (she needs disability benefits to have money to leave husband).

8

Case 1:15-cv-00011-JLH Document 21 Filed 11/10/15 Page 8 of 9
determination that Ms. Hamman is capable of performing a reduced range of sedentary

work. The ALJ made no reversible legal error. For these reasons, I recommend

AFFIRMING the Commissioner’s decision and DISMISSING Plaintiff’s Complaint (docket

entry # 2) with prejudice.

Dated this 10th day of November, 2015.

____________________________________

JOE J. VOLPE

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

9

Case 1:15-cv-00011-JLH Document 21 Filed 11/10/15 Page 9 of 9