Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ared-4_15-cv-00060/USCOURTS-ared-4_15-cv-00060-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 865
Nature of Suit: Social Security - RSI (405(g))
Cause of Action: 42:0405 Review of HHS Decision

---

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS

Christa Shimeka Goldbird Plaintiff

v. No. 4:15‐CV–060‐SWW‐JTK

Carolyn W. Colvin, Acting Commissioner,

Social Security Administration Defendant

Recommended Disposition

Instructions

The following recommended disposition was prepared for U.S. District Judge

Susan W. Wright.  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 Wright

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-00060-SWW Document 10 Filed 09/03/15 Page 1 of 8
Reasoning for Recommended Disposition

Christa Shimeka Goldbird seeks judicial review of the denial of her application

for social security disability benefits.3  Goldbird last worked as a patient service

associate for UAMS Hospital.4

  She claims she has been disabled since April 2011 when

she stopped working.  She based disability on learning disability, sleep apnea,

migraines, and sickle cell trait.5

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

identified lumbago, migraine headaches, obesity, and sleep apnea as severe

impairments.6  The ALJ determined Goldbird can do light work that doesn’t require

frequent bending.7  Because a vocational expert identified available work,8 the ALJ

determined Goldbird isn’t disabled and denied the application.9

3

SSA record at pp. 117 & 124 (applying on Sept. 20, 2011 and alleging disability

beginning Apr. 25, 2011).

4

Id. at p. 32, 149 & 164.

5

Id. at p. 148.

6

Id. at p. 13.  Lumbago, or back pain, is not an impairment; it is a symptom.

7

Id. at p. 16.

8

Id. at p. 51.

9

Id. at pp. 21‐22.

2

Case 4:15-cv-00060-SWW Document 10 Filed 09/03/15 Page 2 of 8
After the Appeals Council denied review,10 the ALJ’s decision became the

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

case to challenge the decision.12  In reviewing the decision, the court must determine

whether substantial evidence supports the decision and whether the ALJ made a legal

error.13  This recommendation explains why substantial evidence supports the decision

and why the ALJ made no legal error.

Goldbird’s allegations. Goldbird challenges the evaluation of her mental

impairment and complaints of disabling pain.  She claims she is more limited than the

ALJ determined.  She maintains substantial evidence does not support the ALJ’s

decision.14

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.

13See 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.”).

14Docket entry # 8.

3

Case 4:15-cv-00060-SWW Document 10 Filed 09/03/15 Page 3 of 8
Applicable legal principles.  For substantial evidence to exist, a reasonable mind

must accept the evidence as adequate to show Goldbird can do some light work.15

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

carrying of objects weighing up to 10 pounds.”16  The ALJ required light work that

doesn’t require frequent bending.  For the following reasons, a reasonable mind will

accept the evidence as adequate to show Goldbird can do light work:

1.  Medical evidence establishes no disabling physical impairment.  The

claimant bears the burden of proving she is disabled;17 she must prove her

claim with medical evidence.18  Goldbird claims she could no longer work

at the hospital due to back pain, but the medical evidence shows no

serious illness.19  Doctors prescribed muscle relaxers for muscle spasms

and physical therapy, but no strong pain medication.  These medical

recommendations suggest nothing preventing light work.

15Britton v. Sullivan, 908 F.2d 328, 330 (8th Cir. 1990).

1620 C.F.R. §§ 404.1567(b) & 416.967(b).

17Locher v. Sullivan, 968 F.2d 725, 727 (8th Cir. 1992).

1842 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.

§ 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.”).

19SSA record at p. 312 (“I’ve explained her [xray] and MRI (in2007) results which

did not show any serious illness.”).

4

Case 4:15-cv-00060-SWW Document 10 Filed 09/03/15 Page 4 of 8
2.  Chronic conditions can be controlled with treatment.  After she

stopped working, Goldbird was diagnosed with hypertension.20  Doctors

prescribed anti‐hypertension medication, weight loss, and exercise.21

After treatment, hypertension was well‐controlled.22  Doctors also

prescribed medication to prevent migraines and to control headache pain.

These medical recommendations indicate Goldbird’s symptoms can be

controlled with treatment.  “An impairment which can be controlled by

treatment or medication is not considered disabling.”23

3.  Non‐compliance undermines the claim.  Before she stopped working,

Goldbird was diagnosed with mild sleep apnea.24  Sleep apnea can cause

daytime sleepiness, headaches, interrupted sleep, fatigue, problems with

concentration, memory loss, intellectual impairment, anxiety, and

depression.25  Goldbird complained about some of these symptoms.

Her doctor recommended continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP).26

Her symptoms improved with CPAP,27 but she didn’t use it as

prescribed.28  A claimant who doesn’t follow prescribed treatment without

20Id. at p. 347.

21Id. at pp. 346‐47.

22Id. at p. 387.

23Estes v. Barnhart, 275 F.3d 722, 725 (8th Cir. 2002).

24SSA record at p. 250.

25Robinson, Richard & Rebecca J. Frey, Sleep Apnea, 5 The Gale Encyclopedia of

Med. 4018 (4th ed.).

26SSA record at p. 234.

27Id. at p. 218 (feels rested) & p. 233 (headaches no longer a problem).

28Id. at p. 218.

5

Case 4:15-cv-00060-SWW Document 10 Filed 09/03/15 Page 5 of 8
good reason is barred from receiving disability benefits.29

4.  The ALJ had a sufficient basis for discounting complaints of

disabling pain.  The ALJ must evaluate the claimant’s credibility before

determining her ability to work.30  The ALJ followed the required two‐step

process and considered the required factors,31 so the court must determine

whether substantial evidence supports the credibility evaluation.

“Subjective complaints may be discounted if there are inconsistencies in

the evidence as a whole.”32  The ALJ properly observed that “claims of

debilitated functioning are not consistent with contemporaneous reports

of actual functioning.33  Goldbird cares for four special needs children

while taking college courses.  The ALJ properly reasoned that “the

objective medical evidence does not fully support the claimant’s

allegations.”34  Goldbird reported endless, uncontrollable pain,35 but

medical providers prescribed muscle relaxers and over‐the‐counter pain

medication.36

2920 C.F.R. §§ 404.1530 & 416.930 (“In order to get benefits, you must follow

treatment prescribed by your physician if this treatment can restore your ability to

work.”).

30Nelson v. Sullivan, 966 F.2d 363, 366 (8th Cir. 1992).

31See SSR 96‐7p, Policy Interpretation Ruling Titles II & XVI: Evaluation of Symptoms

in Disability Claims: Assessing the Credibility of an Individual’s Statements.

32Polaski v. Heckler, 739 F.2d 1320, 1322 (8th Cir. 1984).

33SSA record at p. 17.

34Id. at p. 19.

35Id. at p. 180.

36Black v. Apfel, 143 F.3d 383, 386 (8th Cir. 1998) (conservative course of treatment

undermined claimant’s claim of disabling back pain); Haynes v. Shalala, 26 F.3d 812, 814‐

15 (8th Cir. 1994) (“A lack of strong pain medication is inconsistent with subjective

complaints of disabling pain.”); Smith v. Shalala, 987 F.2d 1371, 1374‐75 (8th Cir. 1993)

6

Case 4:15-cv-00060-SWW Document 10 Filed 09/03/15 Page 6 of 8
5.  The evidence shows no marked mental limitation.  The regulations

specify a special technique for evaluating mental impairment.37  Goldbird

challenges the special‐technique findings.  The ALJ found Goldbird has

mild limitations in activities of daily living, social functioning, and

concentration, persistence or pace;38 Goldbird claims marked limitations.

“A marked limitation may arise when several activities or functions are

impaired, or even when only one is impaired, as long as the degree of

limitation is such as to interfere seriously with [the claimant’s] ability to

function independently, appropriately, effectively, and on a sustained

basis.”39  The evidence shows no more than mild limitation.  With help

from her mother, Goldbird cares for four special needs children, takes the

children to appointments, and helps them with homework.  She attends

college and shops for household necessities.  She does laundry and

household chores.  These activities suggest no marked limitation.

6.  Vocational evidence supports the decision.  The ALJ asked a

vocational expert about the availability of light work that does not require

frequent bending.40  The vocational expert identified companion and

playroom attendant as representative work.41  The availability of these

jobs shows work exists that Goldbird can do, regardless of whether such

work exists where she lives, whether a job vacancy exists, or whether she

(upholding credibility evaluation where claimant medical evidence did not support

complaint of disabling back pain, claimant had not sought regular medical treatment,

physicians only muscle relaxers and mild pain relievers when claimant sought

treatment, physicians did not significantly restrict claimant’s activities, claimant’s

activities were inconsistent with disabling pain, claimant did not appear uncomfortable

sitting during the hearing, and no witness corroborated complaints of pain).

37See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520a & 416.920a.

38SSA record at p. 15.

3920 C.F.R. pt. 404, subpt. P, app. 1, § 12.00C.

40SSA record at p. 50.

41Id. at p. 51.

7

Case 4:15-cv-00060-SWW Document 10 Filed 09/03/15 Page 7 of 8
would be hired if she applied for work.42

Conclusion and Recommended Disposition

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

accept the evidence as adequate to support the decision.  Medical evidence shows no

impairment preventing light work.  Vocational evidence shows work exists that

Goldbird can do.  The ALJ made no harmful legal error.  For these reasons, the

undersigned magistrate judge recommends DENYING Goldbird’s request for relief

(docket entry # 1) and AFFIRMING the Commissioner’s decision.

Dated this 3rd day of September, 2015.

____________________________________

United States Magistrate Judge

4242 U.S.C. § 1382c(a)(3)(B).

8

Case 4:15-cv-00060-SWW Document 10 Filed 09/03/15 Page 8 of 8