Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ared-4_15-cv-00215/USCOURTS-ared-4_15-cv-00215-0/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)

---

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS

WESTERN DIVISION

Roberta L. Calvert Plaintiff

v. No. 4:15CV00215 JLH-JTR

Carolyn W. Colvin, Acting Commissioner,

Social Security Administration Defendant

Instructions for Recommended Disposition

The following recommended disposition was prepared for 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).

2

Griffini 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 4:15-cv-00215-JLH Document 11 Filed 04/21/16 Page 1 of 9
Reasoning for Recommended Disposition

Roberta L. Calvert seeks judicial review of the denial of her application for

social security disability benefits.3

 Calvert last worked as an accounting technician

for the Tennessee Department of Labor and Workforce.4

 She stopped working when

she moved to Arkansas.5

 Eight months later, she applied for disability benefits. She

based disability on degenerative disc disease, emphysema, and a hole in her eardrum.6

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

Commissioner’s ALJ identified back disorder and emphysema as severe impairments.7

The ALJ determined Calvert can do some light work,8

 and her past sedentary work.9

Because a person who can do past work is not disabled under social security law, the

ALJ denied the application.

3

SSA record at pp. 195 & 200 (applying on July 31, 2012 and alleging disability

beginning Nov. 15, 2011).

4

Id. at pp. 229, 250 & 257.

5

Id. at p. 437 (Nov. 7, 2011: reporting that she is moving next week).

6

Id. at p. 248.

7

Id. at p. 13.

8

Id. at p. 14.

9

Id. at p. 20.

2

Case 4:15-cv-00215-JLH Document 11 Filed 04/21/16 Page 2 of 9
After the Appeals Council denied review,10 the ALJ’s decision became the

Commissioner’s final decision for the purpose of judicial review.11 Calvert filed this

case to challenge the decision.12 This recommendation explains why the court should

affirm the decision.

Calvert’s allegation. Calvert challenges the ALJ’s credibility evaluation. She

says the evaluation was inadequate for discounting her testimony and the testimony

of her husband. This error, she says, resulted in an erroneous determination about her

ability to work. She contends substantial evidence does not support the decision.13

Applicable legal principles. When reviewing a decision denying an

application for disability benefits, the court must determine whether substantial

evidence supports the decision and whether the ALJ made a legal error.14 For

10Id. at p. 1.

11See 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).

12Docket entry # 1.

13Docket entry # 9.

14See 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

3

Case 4:15-cv-00215-JLH Document 11 Filed 04/21/16 Page 3 of 9
substantial evidence to exist, a reasonable mind must accept the evidence as adequate

to support the determination that Calvert can do past work.

“Light work involves lifting no more than 20 pounds at a time with frequent

lifting or carrying of objects weighing up to 10 pounds.”15 The ALJ determined

Calvert’s impairments posed non-exertional limitations and placed the following

limitations on light work: (1) occasional climbing, balancing, stooping, kneeling,

crouching, and crawling; and (2) avoid moderate exposure to fumes, dusts, odors,

gases, and poor ventilation.16 The question for the court is whether a reasonable mind

will accept the evidence as adequate to show Calvert can work within these

limitations.

A reasonable mind will accept the evidence as adequate for the following

reasons: 

1. Medical evidence establishes no disabling symptoms. A claimant

must prove disability with medical evidence; subjective allegations are

not enough.17 Remote medical evidence shows a history of eardrum

substantial evidence in the record as a whole to support the conclusion that the

claimant was not disabled.”).

1520 C.F.R. §§ 404.1567(b) & 416.967(b).

16SSA record at p. 14.

1742 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

4

Case 4:15-cv-00215-JLH Document 11 Filed 04/21/16 Page 4 of 9
repair,18 moderate restrictive lung disease,19 and mild degenerative

changes in the lumbar spine.20 A musculoskeletal specialist attributed

back pain to smoking,21 but Calvert continued to smoke.22

The more relevant evidence — evidence from the time period for which

benefits were denied — shows no lung obstruction.23 Diagnostic

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 & 416.908 (“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 & 416.929 (“[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.”).

18SSA record at p. 362 (Mar. 2, 2009: operative report for ear drum repair) &

p. 340 (Apr. 17, 2009: healing well, hearing improved).

19Id. at p. 475 (Sept. 20, 2002: pulmonary function testing showing moderate

restrictive lung disease).

20Id. at p. 327 (May 7, 2009: per neurosurgeon, diagnostic imaging shows mild

degenerative disc disease; most of her problems are mechanical).

21Id. (she needs to get off nicotine immediately).

22Id. at p. 459 (May 21, 2013 (she’s been smoking half a pack of cigarettes

daily).

23Id. at p. 502 (Mar. 14, 2013: pulmonary function testing shows no

obstruction).

5

Case 4:15-cv-00215-JLH Document 11 Filed 04/21/16 Page 5 of 9
imaging showed slight emphysema.24 Calvert controlled respiratory

symptoms by cutting back on smoking and taking medication.25

According to a lung specialist, good nutrition and exercising are the most

important considerations in improving respiratory symptoms.26

Calvert complained about back pain, but pain medication worked well.27

She continued to smoke.28 An ear specialist recommended an evaluation

for ear drum repair and recommended hearing aids.29 There’s no

indication Calvert pursued the recommendations. Medical

recommendations indicate problems with back pain and hearing can be

controlled with treatment. Symptoms that can be controlled by treatment

are not considered disabling.30

2. Inconsistencies support the credibility evaluation. Calvert testified

that back pain forces her to spend all day in bed, on the couch, or in a

recliner.31 She said her gynecologist told her to limit lifting to five

pounds.32 She claimed she uses a breathing treatment four times daily.33

Her husband testified about similar symptoms.34 Calvert complains

24Id.

25Id.

26Id.

27Id. at p. 461.

28Id. at p. 462.

29Id. at p. 451.

30Estes v. Barnhart, 275 F.3d 722, 725 (8th Cir. 2002).

31SSA record at pp. 42, 49, 51 & 53-54.

32Id. at p. 47.

33Id. at p. 46.

34Id. at pp. 56-60.

6

Case 4:15-cv-00215-JLH Document 11 Filed 04/21/16 Page 6 of 9
because the ALJ discounted the credibility of the allegations.

An ALJ must evaluate the claimant’s credibility because subjective

complaints play a role in determining the claimant’s ability to work.35

An ALJ may discount subjective allegations based on “inconsistencies

in the evidence as a whole.”36 A reviewing court must “defer to an

ALJ’s credibility finding as long as the ALJ explicitly discredits a

claimant’s testimony and gives a good reason for doing so.”37

The ALJ discounted the testimony because the “severity of symptoms

and limitations alleged by the claimant are simply not consistent with the

objective medical evidence of record.”38 This reason is a good reason for

discounting allegations.

As the ALJ observed, Calvert’s most “recent pulmonary function study

indicated moderate COPD without obstruction, and it was noted that she

was doing ‘quite well on Advair and nebulizers.’”39 Calvert gave

conflicting reports about when she stopped smoking.40 Calvert may have

back pain, but diagnostic imaging of the back provides no basis for

disabling pain.

35Ellis v. Barnhart, 392 F.3d 988, 995-96 (8th Cir. 2005).

36Polaski v. Heckler, 739 F.2d 1320, 1322 (8th Cir. 1984).

37Wildman v. Astrue, 596 F.3d 959, 968 (8th Cir. 2010).

38SSA record at p. 20.

39Id.

40Compare id. at p. 64 (“I haven’t smoked in almost two years. ... Well ... I

haven’t smoked in way over a year.”) with id. at p. 65 (stopped smoking three months

ago). See id. at p. 443 (Aug. 27, 2012: reporting that she is a non-smoker), p. 450-51

(Mar. 5, 2013: she says she stopped smoking in Jan. 2011, but she smells like cigarette

smoke), p. 502 (Mar. 14, 2013: she says she no longer smokes), p. 464 (Apr. 1, 2013:

smoking one pack per day), p. 462 (Apr. 30, 2012: smoking .5 pack per day) & p. 458

(May 21, 2013 (smoking .5 pack per day).

7

Case 4:15-cv-00215-JLH Document 11 Filed 04/21/16 Page 7 of 9
Calvert alleges disabling symptoms, but she’s had little medical

treatment. Initially, the lack of treatment may have flowed from losing

medical insurance, but soon after she obtained medical insurance.41

When she sought treatment, a lung specialist recommended good

nutrition and exercise.42 An ear specialist recommended a surgical

consultation and hearing aids.43 A pain specialist prescribed pain-relief

measures.44 Treatment records document low back tenderness and

decreased range of motion,45 and diminished hearing,46 but nothing

supporting alleged symptoms. The inconsistency between the

allegations and the medical evidence, treatment history, and prescribed

treatment provide a sufficient basis for discounting credibility.

3. Vocational evidence supports the decision. After determining

Calvert’s ability to work, the ALJ asked a vocational expert about past

work. The vocational expert classified Calvert’s past work as an

accounting technician, accounting clerk, and employment clerk as skilled

sedentary work; work as an inventory clerk was classified as semiskilled-medium work.47 According to the vocational expert, a person

who can do light work with the ALJ’s limitations can work as an

accounting technician, accounting clerk, and employment clerk.48 The

vocational evidence supports the determination that Calvert can do her

41Id. at pp. 288 & 292 (attributing lack of treatment to gap in medical insurance

after Calvert stopped working until husband obtained new job).

42Id. at p. 502.

43Id. at p. 451.

44Id. at pp. 459, 462 & 466.

45Id. at p. 465.

46Id. at p. 451.

47Id. at p. 67.

48Id. at p. 68.

8

Case 4:15-cv-00215-JLH Document 11 Filed 04/21/16 Page 8 of 9
past work. A person who can do her past work is not disabled under

social security law.49

Conclusion and Recommended Disposition

Substantial evidence supports the ALJ’s decision because a reasonable mind

will accept the evidence as adequate to show Calvert can do past work. The ALJ did

not err in evaluating credibility. For these reasons, the undersigned magistrate judge

recommends DENYING the request for relief (docket entry # 2) and AFFIRMING the

Commissioner’s decision.

Dated this 21st day of April, 2016.

___________________________________ 

United States Magistrate Judge

4920 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4), 416.920(a)(4) (“If you can still do your past

relevant work, we will find that you are not disabled.”).

9

Case 4:15-cv-00215-JLH Document 11 Filed 04/21/16 Page 9 of 9