Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_08-cv-01079/USCOURTS-azd-2_08-cv-01079-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 863
Nature of Suit: Social Security - DIWC/DIWW (405(g))
Cause of Action: 42:405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

WO

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Kenneth Lemberg, 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Michael J. Astrue, Commissioner of Social

Security, 

Defendant. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV-08-01079-PHX-FJM

ORDER

The court has before it plaintiff Kenneth Lemberg’s opening brief (doc. 14), the

Commissioner’s response (doc. 15), and plaintiff’s reply (doc. 18).

I.

In October 2001, plaintiff developed neck and shoulder pain while working as a

seafood manager at a grocery store. He underwent decompression and tendon repair

surgeries on his left shoulder on January 29, 2002 and September 10, 2002. He applied for

disability insurance benefits on June 2, 2004, alleging a disability onset date of January 29,

2002. After two hearings, the administrative law judge (“ALJ”) issued a partially favorable

decision concluding that plaintiff was disabled from January 29, 2002 through November 25,

2003 due to degenerative disc disease and an arthritic left shoulder. The ALJ found that

plaintiff’s post-November 25, 2003 impairments, degenerative disc disease, arthritic left

Case 2:08-cv-01079-FJM Document 20 Filed 03/15/10 Page 1 of 6
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 2 -

shoulder, mild dysthymic disorder, and a history of bipolar disorder, did not prevent him

from engaging in other work. The ALJ’s decision became the Commissioner’s final decision

when the Appeals Council denied plaintiff’s request for review. Plaintiff now seeks judicial

review pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).

We may set aside a denial of benefits “only if it is not supported by substantial

evidence or if it is based on legal error.” Thomas v. Barnhart, 278 F.3d 947, 954 (9th Cir.

2002). Substantial evidence is “relevant evidence which, considering the record as a whole,

a reasonable person might accept as adequate to support a conclusion. Where the evidence

is susceptible to more than one rational interpretation, one of which supports the ALJ’s

decision, the ALJ’s conclusion must be upheld.” Id. (citations omitted).

II.

Plaintiff contends that the ALJ’s conclusion that his disability ended on November 25,

2003 was not supported by evidence of medical improvement or a sufficient residual

functional capacity assessment. Aside from inapplicable exceptions, a claimant’s disability

may end when the medical severity of an impairment decreases based on “symptoms, signs

and/or laboratory findings.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1594(b)(1). This medical improvement must

be related to the claimant’s ability to work. Id. § 404.1594(c). Based on the November 25,

2003 report of an examining physician, Dr. Wood, the ALJ concluded that the severity of

plaintiff’s pain had decreased. Dr. Wood’s evaluation of plaintiff’s symptoms supported this

conclusion. In contrast to plaintiff’s complaints of pain after his surgeries, Dr. Wood

described plaintiff’s shoulder pain as constant and slight, increasing to moderate during

active use. Tr. at 321. He also described the pain in plaintiff’s neck, the location of his

degenerative disc disease, as intermittent and slight to moderate. Id.

However, the ALJ failed to properly consider the medical reports of plaintiff’s treating

physician, Dr. Porter. The ALJ credited plaintiff’s pain complaints through November 25,

2003. Id. at 19. Several weeks before Dr. Wood’s examination on October 29, 2003, Dr.

Case 2:08-cv-01079-FJM Document 20 Filed 03/15/10 Page 2 of 6
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

 In his response, the Commissioner suggests that two pages from this report are

missing from the record. The remainder of the report is merely in a different location. Tr.

at 413, 437-38.

2

 While not an issue in this case, the process changes if the criteria for listed

impairments are met. See 20 C.F.R. Part 404, Subpart P, App. 1.

- 3 -

Porter detailed plaintiff’s account of constant and severe pain in an October 7, 2003 report.1

Id. at 437. The ALJ did not resolve this discrepancy between plaintiff’s credited complaints

of severe pain and a finding of medical improvement based on decreased pain symptoms.

The ALJ also failed to properly consider Dr. Porter’s medical reports when he

determined plaintiff’s residual functional capacity. A claimant’s residual functional capacity

is his ability to engage in sustained work-related activities despite his limitations. 20 C.F.R.

§ 404.1545. When determining whether a period of disability ended, an ALJ assesses a

claimant’s residual functional capacity with respect to his prior impairments to see if his

medical improvement was related to his ability to work and with respect to his current

impairments to see if he is able to work.2

 Id. § 404.1594. Here, the ALJ relied on Dr.

Wood’s November 25, 2003 report to conclude that plaintiff regained the physical capacity:

To perform work that is not at a heavy exertional level. With his dominant left

upper extremity he is precluded from work that involves lifting, pushing,

pulling of heavy objects as well as repetitive work at or above the shoulder

level. He is further precluded from repetitive work at or above shoulder level

with his right upper extremity.

Tr. at 26. Heavy work consists of lifting up to 100 pounds at a time with frequent lifting or

carrying of objects up to 50 pounds. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1567. The weight thresholds for

medium work are 50 and 25 pounds. Id. On August 26, 2004, Dr. Porter noted that plaintiff:

[C]ontinues to be impaired related to his current condition and his limitation

for work has to do with functionality of his upper extremities. I told him not

to do any repetitive motion in the upper extremities nor any overhead

activities. Pushing, pulling of the upper extremities also restricted and 20 lb

weight limit for lifting given.

Tr. at 422. The ALJ stated that his assessment of plaintiff’s residual functional capacity was

“not inconsistent” with Dr. Porter’s August 2004 opinion. Id. at 24. It was plainly

inconsistent with Dr. Porter’s limitations on lifting and repetitive use of the arms at any level.

Case 2:08-cv-01079-FJM Document 20 Filed 03/15/10 Page 3 of 6
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 4 -

We will remand plaintiff’s case to the Commissioner because the ALJ’s conclusions

on plaintiff’s medical improvement and residual functional capacity do not comport with

plaintiff’s credited complaints or Dr. Porter’s opinion. Plaintiff also contends that the ALJ’s

residual functional capacity determination failed to provide a function-by-function

assessment or take into account Dr. Porter’s diagnoses and plaintiff’s complaints of fatigue

and an inability to grasp objects. Moreover, he asserts that the ALJ failed to resolve a

conflict between the vocational expert’s testimony and the Dictionary of Occupational Titles.

We are not persuaded that any of these issues would warrant remand independently, but they

are now moot. On remand, the Commissioner shall reassess plaintiff’s medical improvement

and his residual functional capacity.

III.

Finally, plaintiff maintains that the ALJ improperly rejected his subjective complaints

of pain and fatigue after November 25, 2003. An ALJ is entitled to use ordinary techniques

of credibility evaluation, such as considering inconsistencies in a claimant’s testimony.

Burch v. Barnhart, 400 F.3d 676, 680 (9th Cir. 2005). Where, as here, some degree of a

claimant’s symptoms would be expected, his complaints about their severity may be rejected

on evidence of malingering or clear and convincing evidence. Vasquez v. Astrue, 572 F.3d

586, 593-94 (9th Cir. 2009).

The ALJ found that plaintiff’s complaints were not entirely credible based on his

activities, lack of muscle atrophy, lack of supporting medical evidence, driving habits, and

travel. Somewhat ambiguously, the ALJ concluded that these factors were inconsistent with

disability in general, plaintiff’s complaints during treatment, and his hearing testimony.

Contrary to the ALJ’s conclusions, some of the factors were consistent with disability and

plaintiff’s general complaints. But most were inconsistent with his testimony.

The ALJ drew an adverse inference from plaintiff’s activities, which consisted of

reading, watching television, running errands, playing video games, swimming once a month,

cooking a few times a week, tossing a softball, doing laundry, playing board games and

cards, refinishing furniture, and playing with a radio-controlled truck. Tr. at 24. Plaintiff

Case 2:08-cv-01079-FJM Document 20 Filed 03/15/10 Page 4 of 6
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 5 -

points out that many of these activities involve minimal effort, and there is no evidence that

he could sustain the more arduous ones for any length of time. Thus, the ALJ was mistaken

to the extent that he found them necessarily inconsistent with disability.

However, the ALJ also found plaintiff’s activities inconsistent with his alleged

functional limitations. At the first hearing, plaintiff testified that he could only walk about

fifty feet without resting, stand for ten to fifteen minutes, and sit for fifteen to thirty minutes.

Id. at 61. He also claimed that he could not reach his arms over his head, squat, kneel, load

or unload a dishwasher, vacuum, sweep, or mop. Id. at 62, 64. Given these severe asserted

limitations, the ALJ rationally drew an adverse credibility inference based on plaintiff’s

activities.

Similarly, plaintiff’s documented lack of muscle atrophy in his left shoulder was

consistent with evidence that he exercised at home and intermittently engaged in physical

therapy. Id. at 449, 402. Nevertheless, the ALJ rationally concluded that plaintiff’s lack of

muscle atrophy was inconsistent with his claimed lack of use of his shoulder. The ALJ also

properly weighed the absence of objective medical evidence corroborating plaintiff’s

complaints because it was considered along with other permissible factors. See Burch, 400

F.3d at 681.

The ALJ improperly relied on several factors. He drew an adverse inference from

plaintiff’s “ability to drive without problems,” Tr. at 24, even though plaintiff complained

about difficulties with driving. Id. at 455. He also found that plaintiff’s testimony was

inconsistent with a lone flight to California. One short trip cannot bear the weight of such

an inference.

We conclude that the ALJ’s determination that plaintiff’s complaints were not entirely

credible after November 25, 2003 was supported by substantial evidence. The evidence

concerning plaintiff’s activities, lack of muscle atrophy, and lack of supporting medical

evidence, when compared to his testimony, was clear and convincing. Plaintiff’s hearing

testimony also exhibited malingering. The ALJ’s reliance on plaintiff’s ability to drive and

travel was harmless error because it did not negate the validity of his determination. See

Case 2:08-cv-01079-FJM Document 20 Filed 03/15/10 Page 5 of 6
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 6 -

Carmickle v. Comm’r, Soc. Sec. Admin., 533 F.3d 1155, 1162 (9th Cir. 2008). Because we

uphold the ALJ’s credibility determination, plaintiff’s contention that his subjective

complaints must be accepted as true fails. See Vasquez, 572 F.3d at 593-94.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED REMANDING this case to the Commissioner

under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for further consideration in accordance with this

order.

The clerk shall enter final judgment.

DATED this 12th day of March, 2010.

Case 2:08-cv-01079-FJM Document 20 Filed 03/15/10 Page 6 of 6