Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_06-cv-02629/USCOURTS-azd-2_06-cv-02629-0/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 NN

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Azile D. Jackson,

Plaintiff, 

vs.

MichaelJ. Astrue, Commissioner of Social

Security, 

Defendant. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 06-2629-PHX-EHC

ORDER

This is an appeal from the decision of the Commissioner of the Social Security

Administration (“SSA” ) to deny Azile Jackson Title II disability benefits and Title XVI

Supplemental Security Income benefits of the Social Security Act. (Tr. 17).

I. INTRODUCTION

The Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ” ) denied Jackson's claim for disability benefits on

November 8, 2005, and the Appeals Council denied review. (Dkts. 1, 10). Pending before

the Court is Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment, and in the alternative, motion for

remand (Dkt. 12), and Defendant’s cross-motion for summary judgment. (Dkt. 16). 

II. STANDARD OF REVIEW

"The Social Security Administration's disability determination should be upheld unless

it contains legal error or is not supported by substantial evidence.” Orn v. Astrue, 495 F.3d

625, 630 (9th Cir. 2007) (citing Stout v. Comm'r, Soc. Sec. Admin., 454 F.3d 1050, 1052

(9th Cir.2006); 42 U.S.C. §§ 405(g), 1383(c)(3)). “Substantial evidence is more than a mere

Case 2:06-cv-02629-EHC Document 20 Filed 04/21/08 Page 1 of 14
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

Past relevant work is work performed within the past 15 years, that was substantial

gainful activity, and that lasted long enough to acquire sufficient ability to do the job. 20

C.F.R. § 416.960(b)(1).

- 2 -

scintilla but less that a preponderance.” Bayliss v. Barnhart, 427 F.3d 1211, 1214 n. 1 (9th

Cir. 2005) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). “[A] reviewing court must

consider the entire record as a whole and may not affirm simply by isolating a specific

quantum of supporting evidence.” Orn at 630. (internal quotation marks and citations

omitted).

III. FACTS

A. Education and Employment Background

Plaintiff, 45, was born on September 5, 1963. (Tr. 53, 481). She has an eighth grade

education and her past relevant work1 includes 7.5 years as a certified nursing assistant

(“CNA”) and six months as an appointment scheduler. (Tr. 70, 93, 115-17). Her alleged

onset of disability is July 17, 2001. (Tr. 20, 69).

B. Physical Condition/Medical Treatment

The parties agree that Plaintiff suffered an industrial injury on September 26, 2000. (Dkt.

12, p.3; Dkt. 17, p. 2). As a CNA, Jackson attempted to pick up a patient who had fallen

down and, in the process, injured her back. According to one of her treating doctors, Plaintiff

has had “intermittent episodes of low back pain radiating to the left lower extremity,” dating

back to approximately 1997.(Tr. 194). Although medication and physical therapy alleviated

her pain after the September 2000 injury, it recurred on July 17, 2001, and she was treated

at the emergency room with additional analgesics. (Tr. 194). 

Since then, Plaintiff has undergone severalsurgeries, including a two-level lumbarspinal

fusion that was completed in two separate surgical procedures, due to the complication of a

deep venous blood clot, which required a thrombectomy. She also underwent surgery

because the instrumentation inserted in the fusion was painful and had to be removed. The

hardware removal was complicated by a staph infection which required further surgery.

Case 2:06-cv-02629-EHC Document 20 Filed 04/21/08 Page 2 of 14
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

Spondylosis - “Outgrowth of immature bony processes from the vertebrae, reflecting

the presence of degenerative disease and calcification. It includes cervical and lumbar

spondylosis.” (Dkt. 12, Appendix A, p. 3 (citation omitted)).

3

Osteophyte - “A bony outgrowth or protuberance.” (Dkt. 12, Appendix A, p. 3

(citation omitted)).

4

Radiculopathy - “Disease involving a spinal nerve root . . .which may result from

compression related to intervertebral disk displacement; spinal cord injuries; spinal diseases;

and other conditions. Clinical manifestations include radicular pain, weakness, and sensory

loss referable to structures innervated by the involved nerve root.” (Dkt. 12, Appendix A, p.

3 (citation omitted)).

- 3 -

1. Treating physicians

a) Gary Lowery, M.D., Ph. D.

09/12/01 - Plaintiff’s third bout of low back pain. (Tr. 195). Lumbosacral spine x-rays

show straightening of the curvature, limited range of motion, and minimal hypertrophic

spondylosis.2 (Tr. 280).

11/20/01 - MRIshows degenerative disk disease; mild posterior disk herniation; posterior

osteophyte3 formation; and mild to moderate spinal stenosis.

02/08/02 - Surgery for lumbar spondylosis with radiculopathy.4 Anterior lumbar

interbody fusion L5-S1 with allograft and harvesting ofright iliac crest graft atL4-S1.(Tr.

163). Complication of vascular clot which required thrombectomy. (Tr. 181).

03/08/02 - Surgery fusion procedure continued from February 8, 2002; posterior spinal

instrumentation with fixator at L4-L5. (Tr. 163, 265).

10/17/02 - Right hardware injection significantly reduces Plaintiff’s pain. (Tr. 148).

10/24/02 - Right lumbar hardware injection. Intact pedicle screws fixation from L4

through the sacrum. (Tr. 144). 

11/13/02 - Dr. Lowery notes “the numbness and tingling is coming back.” (Tr. 171).

02/26/03 - Injection at the L5 nerve root block. (Tr. 169).

b) Dr. Naftaly Attias - orthopedic surgeon

09/02/03 - Main problem is right leg pain with diminished reflex. Injection of L5 nerve

root resulted in 100% pain relief lasting a few weeks. (Tr. 163).

10/07/03 - Impression: Nonunion of L4-L5 and L5-S1 anterior and posterior fusion.

Doctor recommends hardware removal, possible fusion with instrumentation, possible

decompression of nerve roots. (Tr. 160-61).

Case 2:06-cv-02629-EHC Document 20 Filed 04/21/08 Page 3 of 14
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

Paresthesia - “An abnormal sensation, such as of burning, pricking, tickling, or

tingling.” Stedman’s Medical Dictionary 1316 (27th ed. 2000).

6

“Function work capacity” is also referred to as “FC” and “FAC.”

7

See note 6, supra.

8

See note 6, supra.

- 4 -

10/29/03 - Surgery - Preoperative diagnosis - 1) “Painful hardware with postoperative

displacement of sacral pedicle screws [seen on x-rays].” 2) Paresthesias5, L4-L5, right,

Doctor found “huge amount of scar tissue in the midline,” removed the “posterior

hardware segmental instrumentation,” ascertained that the fusion was “very stable,” and

performed a foraminotomy plus laminotomy, L4-5, right. (Tr. 214-15). 

11/11/03 - Surgery - Admitted for emergency care; October surgery was complicated by

a “[m]ethicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infection of superficial back surgical

wound” (Tr. 325, 393). 

06/01/04 - Plaintiff has difficulty doing anything for a prolonged period. Doctor observes

her range of motion is diminished in the lumbar spine. (Tr. 412). To ascertain how

disabled she is and how much work she can perform, Dr. Attias recommends a “function

work capacity”6 study. (Tr. 412).

10/26/04 - Plaintiff has back pain daily, sometimes numbness and pain in right foot,

difficulty sleeping at night, and “anxiety . . . from time to time.” (Tr. 410). Doctor

observes she has “marked limitation in range of motion.” (Tr. 410). Plaintiff can no

longer work as a nurse, and opinesthat, in order to ascertain “the exact parameter of what

type of work she can do,” she “needs the FC7 evaluation.” (Tr. 410). Her insurance,

however, does not cover it. (Tr. 410).

08/12/05 - Dr. Attias releases Plaintiff for work limited to two hours a day in seated

position only; he cannot be more specific without the FAC8 examination which has not

been done. Because she is not interested in further surgical intervention, Jackson is

referred to a pain specialist. (Tr. 423-25).

c) Bogdan Anghel, M.D. and Brian A. Cody, M.S., PA-C 

Dr. Attias refers Plaintiff to Advanced Pain Treatment and Rehab and was evaluated on

August 30, 2005. (Tr. 472-75). They assessed “[l]ow back and bilateral lower extremity

radicular symptoms and myofascial/myoligamentous referred pain secondary to failed back

surgery syndrome and radiculopathy.” (Tr. 474). The plan includes further treatment with

different pain intervention modalities. (Tr. 475).

Case 2:06-cv-02629-EHC Document 20 Filed 04/21/08 Page 4 of 14
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

9

Dr. Cunningham assessed Plaintiff could lift 20 pounds occasionally and 10 pounds

frequently; stand/walk at least 2 hours in 8-hour day; sit 6 hours in 8-hour day; climb/stoop/

kneel crouch occasionally; and never crawl. (Tr. 329).

10She opines Plaintiff is limited to the following in an eight-hour workday: sit six

hours; stand/walk less than six, but at least two hours. She can lift/carry 20 pounds

occasionally, 10 pounds frequently, partially crouch with support occasionally, and

climb/stoop/balance/kneel/crawl occasionally. (Tr. 380-83).

11Residual Functional Capacity (“RFC”) is defined as what the claimant can still do

despite limitations due to physical and/or mental impairments. (See Tr. 21).

12Exertional limitations: Lift/carry/push/pull 20 pounds occasionally and 10 pounds

frequently; stand/walk and sit 6 hours out of 8-hour day; climb, balance, stoop, kneel, crouch,

crawl occasionally; avoid concentrated exposure to extreme cold, wetness, humidity, hazards.

- 5 -

2. Examining, non-treating physicians

a) Dr. Keith Cunningham - SSA referral

On December 18, 2003, Dr. Cunningham observes that Plaintiff’s gait and coordination

are normal but has a “reversal abnormal lordotic curvature,” and “can flex forward to only

60 degrees.” (Tr. 326).Jackson reportsshe has constant lower back pain with any prolonged

walking or standing more than 20-30 minutes. She cannot bend, lift or stoop. She continues

to have numbness on the top of the right foot and shin area. (Tr. 325). He concludes that

“[o]verall, subjective complaints were consistent with objective findings.” (Tr. 327).9

b) Dr. Lucia Nicla Angela McPhee - SSA referral

On April 28, 2004, Dr. McPhee, who specializesin Physical Medicine andRehabilitation,

evaluates Plaintiff. The doctor observes some normal movements, some with marked

limitations, and some with mild limitations.10 Her diagnoses were obesity, and “[c]hronic

low back pain into the right lower extremity with history of lumbar fusion, February 2002.”

(Tr. 380). 

3. Non-examining, non-treating medical consultants

04/03/03 - RFC11 - Primary diagnosis: Status post anterior lumbar interbody fusion

and posterior spinal instrumentation. Secondary diagnosis: Back pain. (Tr. 150).12

Plaintiff partially credible. Symptoms attributable to a medically determinable

impairment. Severity of symptoms consistent with the medical and nonmedical evidence.

Case 2:06-cv-02629-EHC Document 20 Filed 04/21/08 Page 5 of 14
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

13See note 10, supra.

14See note 10, supra.

- 6 -

Jackson still has back pain, recovering from surgery, related to hardware with anticipated

removal of hardware. (Tr. 155).

01/07/04 - RFC - Consultant’s assessment mirrors what Dr. McPhee will later list as

physical restrictions,13 and opines that although Plaintiff's symptoms were attributable to

medically determinable impairments, their severity and duration were disproportionate

to the expected severity and duration on the basis of those impairments. (Tr. 335).

05/13/04 - RFC - A non-examining medical consultant reviews Dr. McPhee’s report and

agrees with her opinions.14 (Tr. 385-92). He opines that Plaintiff is “partially credible.”

(Tr. 390).

C. Mental Condition

1. Examining physician - George DeLong, Ph.D. - SSA referral

Plaintiff was examined on October 8, 2003 for a psychiatric consultation. (Tr. 206-09).

Reportedly, Jackson was both physically abused and sexually molested. She has a family

history of mental illness on the maternal side. (Tr. 207).

The doctor observes that Plaintiff’s posture when seated was unusual; she placed her left

arm behind her back to provide additional support, and had a “somewhat rigid” gait. (Tr.

207). She became tearful over the murder of her son, and “does occasionally hear her name

called and has preservative thoughts particularly about the death of her son from time-totime.” (Tr. 207-08). She does not have hallucinations, delusions, or suicidal ideation. (Tr.

208). Dr. DeLong observes that “[o]bjectively, she appears somewhat depressed.” Plaintiff

says she is depressed and sometime cries “for no reason.” (Tr. 208).

Dr. DeLong’s Diagnostic Impression:

Axis I Adjustment disorder with depressive anxious mood associated with the general

 medical condition (chronic pain).

Axis II Deferred.

Axis III Orthopedic impairments of pain by report.

(Tr. 209).

Dr. DeLong observesthatJackson is “pleasant and cooperative but mildly depressed. She

is not histrionic or dramatic in her presentation but is rather quite credible in her posture and

Case 2:06-cv-02629-EHC Document 20 Filed 04/21/08 Page 6 of 14
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

15Dr. DeLong completed a state agency form: Very good - maintain personal

appearance; Limited but satisfactory - follow work rules, relate to co-workers, deal with

public, interact with supervisors, function independently, understand/remember/carry out

simple job instructions, behave in emotionally stable manner; Seriously limited - use

judgment, maintain attention/concentration, understand/remember/carry out complex job

instructions nor detailed (but not complex) job instructions, relate predictably in social

situations, demonstrate reliability; Seriously limited to poor/none - deal with work stresses.

16 Defined as a “[d]isturbance of mood, accompanied by a full or partial manic or

depressive syndrome . . . ” (Tr. 341).

17He lists depressive symptoms of sleep disturbance; psychomotor agitation or

retardation; decreased energy; feelings of guilt or worthlessness; difficulty concentrating or

thinking.(Tr. 310). He describes restrictions of daily living activities (with pain); difficulties

in maintaining social functioning, and difficulties in maintaining concentration, persistence

or pace, as mildly limited. (Tr. 317). Dr. Campbell opines Plaintiff was either “moderately

limited” or “not significantly limited” in Understanding/Memory, Sustained

Concentration/Persistence, Social Interaction, and Adaptation. (Tr. 321-22). 

- 7 -

gait.” (Tr. 209). He opines Plaintiff is “of normal intellectual ability, who shows deficits of

attention and concentration and social judgment.”15 (Tr. 209). 

2. Non-examining physician - James M. Campbell, M.D.

Dr. Campbell agrees with Dr. DeLong that Jackson suffers from an affective/adjustment

disorder,16 with depressive/anxious mood.17 (Tr. 307, 310). He concludes Plaintiff “can

continue simple to detailed job with a low stress environment.” (Tr. 324).

D. Testimony of Plaintiff

On September, 26, 2003, the ALJ hearing was held. Plaintiff testified that her back pain

continues to get worse and the numbness in her foot persists. (Tr. 532). Her doctors have

said the pain and numbness could be from a nerve or the scar tissue. (Tr. 534). She spends

most of her time in her bedroom, alternating between sitting and lying down. She can walk

for thirty minutes, albeit very slowly. (Tr. 536). The longest period she can withstand

without lying down is approximately two hours. (Tr. 539-40). Jackson is taking Zoloft for

her depression. (Tr. 534).

Case 2:06-cv-02629-EHC Document 20 Filed 04/21/08 Page 7 of 14
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

18Light exertional work means lifting no more than 20 pounds occasionally and 10

pounds frequently. (See Tr. 541).

19No crawling, crouching, climbing, squatting, or kneeling. (Tr. 541).

20No “legs pushing, or pulling at foot, or leg controls.” (Tr. 541).

- 8 -

E. Testimony of Vocational Expert

Vocational expert (“VE”) Dr. George J. Blueth testified that:

• Plaintiff’s prior position as a CNA is semi-skilled medium exertional level work, and her

position as an appointment scheduler is unskilled, sedentary work. (Tr. 541).

• an individual who is able to do unskilled, light exertional18 work with postural

limitations,19 lower extremity limitations,20 and a sit/stand option has job opportunities that

exist in significant numbers in the national economy and in the state of Arizona. Some

examples are positions as a quality control inspector, assembly worker, and cashier. (Tr.

542). 

• an individual requiring more than morning and afternoon breaks of 10 to 15 minutes, with

lunch break of 30 minutesto an hour would be problematic, as would absenteeismof more

than once a month. (Tr. 542).

F. ALJ’s Findings

The ALJ concluded that Jackson has the RFC to perform “light” exertional work with

restrictions, including a sit/stand option. She can lift/carry no more than ten pounds on a

frequent basis and twenty pounds occasionally. (Tr. 21). She is precluded from climbing,

crouching, squatting, kneeling, crawling, and using her lower extremities for pushing or

pulling. (Tr. 21).

The ALJ found that Plaintiff’s mental impairments include an anxiety disorder and an

adjustment disorder. (Tr. 22). “Based on the evidence as a whole,” the ALJ found that these

disorders caused “only mild limitations in her activities of daily living and in her social

functioning.” (Tr. 23). He noted that Plaintiff babysits her granddaughter; watches

television; sings; goes shopping with her daughter; is a single parent and sole caretaker of

her 16-year-old son; cooks meals by sitting in a chair; cleans the house weekly; and does

laundry. (Tr. 23). 

The ALJ also found that Plaintiff’s mental impairments result in moderate limitations in

her ability to concentrate. (Tr. 23). He observed that she watches television and movies,

Case 2:06-cv-02629-EHC Document 20 Filed 04/21/08 Page 8 of 14
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

21Unless the impairment is expected to result in death, the duration requirement is at

least 12 months, or is expected to last for a continuous period of at least 12 months. 20 C.F.R.

§ 404.1509.

- 9 -

reads books, does crossword puzzles, and plays video games; however, during her mental

status examination, she “had difficulty with simple calculations but judgment and

abstractions were accomplished well.” (Tr. 23). Due to her mental impairments, the ALJ

concluded she was limited to doing unskilled work. (Tr. 23).

In summary, Plaintiff “has the ability to perform light exertional unskilled work with

restrictions.”(Tr. 23).

IV. ANALYSIS

When evaluating a claim for a Period of Disability and Disability Insurance Benefits, the

claimant has the burden of establishing disability. A disability is defined as the “inability to

engage in any substantial gainful activity by reason of any medically determinable physical

or mental impairment which can be expected to result in death or which has lasted or can be

expected to last for a continuous period of not less than 12 months.” 42 U.S.C. §

423(d)(1)(A). 

The ALJ must engage in a five-step evaluation pursuant to 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520 and

416.920 to determine whether the claimant is disabled. In the first four steps of the analysis

the claimant has the burden of demonstrating that: 

1. the claimant has not engaged in substantial gainful activity since filing for benefits;

2. the claimant's alleged impairment, or combination of impairments, is sufficiently severe

and meets the duration requirement;21

3. if a severe impairment is found, it meets or equals an impairment found in the Listing of

Impairments and meets the duration requirement; if so, the claimant is disabled and the

analysis ends. If not,

4. after considering all impairmentsin combination and determining the claimant's Residual

Functional Capacity (“RFC”), the claimant can no longer perform past relevant work.

5. If the claimant establishes Step 4, the burden shifts to the SSA to demonstrate that the

claimant is not disabled and can still engage in some type of substantial gainful activity

that exists in significant numbers in the national economy. See 20 C.F.R. §

404.1560(c)(2).

Case 2:06-cv-02629-EHC Document 20 Filed 04/21/08 Page 9 of 14
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

22Lift/carry no more than 10 pounds frequently and 20 pounds occasionally.

Precluded from climbing, crouching, squatting, kneeling, crawling, and using lower

extremities for pushing or pulling. (Tr. 21).

- 10 -

The ALJ found that Plaintiff meets Steps 1 and 2. (Tr. 21). The ALJ found Jackson has

the following impairments, which in combination, are sufficiently severe: “chronic low back

pain status post work injury September of 2000, status post surgery February of 2002

involving fusion with hardware placement and grafting,status postsurgery October of 2003

involving hardware removal, obesity, an adjustment disorder and an anxiety disorder.” (Tr.

26). 

According to the ALJ, Jackson does not meet Step 3, in that her impairments, while

severe, did not meet or equal those on the Listing of Impairments. (Tr. 21).

Proceeding to Step 4, the ALJfound Plaintiff’sRFCincludesthe ability to perform“light”

exertional work22 with restrictionsincluding a sit/stand option. (Tr. 21). The ALJ concluded

Jackson could not return to her past relevant work (Tr. 25), and at Step 5, he found she could

still engage in some type of substantial gainful activity that exists in significant numbers in

the national economy. (Tr. 25). Thus, the ALJ concluded that Jackson is not disabled. (Tr.

26).

Plaintiff argues that the ALJ improperly rejected the opinions of the treating and

examining physicians; failed to properly determine Plaintiff’s Mental RFC; and relied on a

deficient vocational opinion based on inadequate questioning ofthe vocational expert. (Dkt.

12).

A. Opinions of Treating Physicians

“By rule, the Social Security Administration favors the opinion of a treating physician

over non-treating physicians.” See Orn v. Astrue, 495 F.3d 625, 631 (9th Cir. 2007) (citing

C.F.R. § 404.1527). The SSA has explained that an ALJ’s finding that a treating source

medical opinion is not well-supported by medically acceptable evidence or is inconsistent

with substantial evidence in the record means only that the opinion is not entitled to

controlling weight, not that the opinion should be rejected. See Orn, 495 F.3d at 632 (citing

Case 2:06-cv-02629-EHC Document 20 Filed 04/21/08 Page 10 of 14
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

- 11 -

§ 404.1527). Treating source medical opinions are still entitled to deference and, in many

cases, will be entitled to the greatest weight and should be adopted, even if it does not meet

the test for controlling weight.” Orn, 495 F.3d at 632; see also Murray v. Heckler, 722 F.2d

499, 502 (9th Cir. 1983) (“If the ALJ wishes to disregard the opinion of the treating

physician, he or she must make findings setting forth specific, legitimate reasons for doing

so that are based on substantial evidence in the record.”). 

The ALJ stated twice that “no treating physician has endorsed [Plaintiff’s] allegations of

disabling pain and limitations.” (Tr. 24). Nonetheless, in the next sentence, he observed that

Jackson’s “treating orthopedic surgeon [Dr. Attias]indicated . . . the claimant can work about

2 hours a day sitting.” (Tr. 24). Taken as true, these limitations would not allow Plaintiff to

work, and would therefore be considered disabling pain for SSA purposes. (See Tr. 542).

Additionally, the ALJ’s finding that Dr. Attias’ opinion was based “solely on the claimant’s

statement to him” isincorrect. (Tr. 24). There is substantial evidence in the record to support

the treating physician’s opinion.

The law in the Ninth Circuit is clear that the ALJ must defer to the treating doctor’s

opinion, even if controverted by another doctor, unlessthe ALJ makesfindings setting forth

specific, legitimate reasons for rejecting it that are based on substantial evidence in the

record. See Lester v. Chater, 81 F.3d 821, 830-31 (9th Cir. 1995). Here, the ALJ gave

“substantial weight to the State Agencymedical consultants who reviewed the claimant’sfile

. . .” His only explanation for doing so was the “great weight of the evidence of record.” (Tr.

25). Dr. Attias’ opinion is entitled to deference, if not controlling weight. The ALJ did not

setforth specific, legitimate reasons,supported by substantial evidence in the record, to reject

the doctor’s opinion. To the contrary, the ALJ’s reasoning was cursory. 

B. Opinions of Examining Physicians

When an examining, non-treating physician relies on the same clinical findings and differs

only in his conclusions, the examining, non-treating doctor’s conclusions are not “substantial

evidence.” Orn 495 F.3d at 632 (emphasis added). For it to be “substantial evidence,” the

examining physician must provide independent clinical findings as follows: “either (1)

Case 2:06-cv-02629-EHC Document 20 Filed 04/21/08 Page 11 of 14
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

- 12 -

diagnoses that differ from those offered by another physician and that are supported by

substantial evidence; or (2) findings based on objective medical tests that the treating

physician has not herself considered.” Id.(citations omitted). Drs. Cunningham and McPhee

did not offerindependent clinical findings to support their differing conclusions and therefore

are not deemed substantial evidence. Dr. Attias’ opinion is entitled to the greatest weight and

is adopted by the Court.

D. Plaintiff’s Credibility

“Pain of sufficient severity caused by a medically diagnosed anatomical, physiological,

or psychological abnormality may provide the basis for determining that a claimant is

disabled.” Robinson v. Barnhart, 469 F.Supp.2d 793, 798 (D. Ariz. 2007) (quoting Light v.

Soc. Sec. Admin., 119 F.3d 789, 792 (9thCir. 1997)) (inner quotations and citations omitted).

“Moreover, once a claimant produces objective medical evidence of an underlying

impairment, an ALJ may not reject a claimant’s subjective complaints based solely on lack

of objective medical evidence to fully corroborate the alleged severity of pain.” Robinson,

469 F.Supp.2d at 798 (quoting Moisa v. Barnhart, 367 F.3d 882, 885 (9th Cir. 2004) (inner

quotations, citations, and alteration omitted).

It is undisputed that Plaintiff has several severe impairments that cause pain. The ALJ

nonetheless found that neither the severity nor the extent of her symptoms of disabling pain

were supported by the medical evidence. (Tr. 23). The ALJ pointed out that the abnormal

clinical findings were limited to moderately reduced back range of motion, the lumbarspine

appeared stable in March 2005 x-rays, and “full healing and full fusion” was reflected in

August 2005 x-rays. He summarized that overall “abnormal clinical findings on examination

have been minimal,” and concluded that Plaintiff’s “allegations of disabling pain and

limitations are not fully supported.” (Tr. 22).

Furthermore, “unless the ALJ makes a finding of malingering based on affirmative

evidence thereof, he or she may only find the claimant not credible by making specific

findings as to credibility and stating clear and convincing reasons for each. Robinson, 469

F.Supp.2d at 798 (quoting Robbins v. Soc. Sec. Admin., 466 F.3d 880, 883, (9th Cir. 2006)

Case 2:06-cv-02629-EHC Document 20 Filed 04/21/08 Page 12 of 14
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

- 13 -

(inner quotations and citation omitted). The ALJ referred to inconsistent statements made

by Plaintiff to support his finding that she was “not fully credible.” (Tr. 23-26).

First, in August 2005 Plaintiff reported to her treating physician that she could not sit at

a job all day long, but earlier, in April 2004, she indicated that sitting was “better tolerated”

than prolonged walking or standing. (Tr. 24). These statements, however, are not

inconsistent. Second, in March 2005, Plaintiff “told her doctor that she was doing well until

two months ago,” according to the ALJ (Tr. 24) (emphasis added). But the doctor’s notes

actually indicate that she “was doing not too bad until about two months ago when she

started to have back pain that was getting progressively worse.” (Tr. 435) (emphasis added).

Moreover, the ALJ isolated various statements from the medical records. For instance,

he quoted that Plaintiff was “much, much better . . . doing well.” (Tr. 24). This notation is

dated March 20, 2002, shortly after the spinal fusion. (Tr. 183). She still required pain

medication at that time, and more importantly, several months later she was treated with

spinal injections to treat the pain; two in October 2002 and one in February 2003. (Tr. 144,

148, 169). In context, there is no inconsistency. 

Furthermore, the ALJlisted various activities Plaintiff does at home which he found were

not inconsistent with the ability to work outside the home: “She can sit sufficiently to read

books, do crossword puzzles, play video games and watch television and movies” (Tr. 24);

without more detail regarding the frequency with which she alternates her activities, this is

not necessarily at odds with her subjective complaints of disabling pain. The ALJ’s

observation that Jackson is “able to sing” is irrelevant, as is the assertion that her role as the

sole parent and caretaker of her 16-year-old son requires her to “be ready at a moment’s

notice to take care of his needs.” (Tr. 24). (Tr. 535-37). Her ability “to leave town for a

family emergency” when her brother was dying of cancer is similarly immaterial. (Tr. 24,

246). Plaintiff’s report that she babysits her granddaughter arguably contradicts her claim

of disabling pain, but without more information, such as how long she babysits and her

granddaughter’s age, it is far from sufficient to find that her complaints of disabling pain

should be disregarded as not credible.

Case 2:06-cv-02629-EHC Document 20 Filed 04/21/08 Page 13 of 14
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

- 14 -

Because the ALJ did not make a finding of malingering, to find Jackson not credible

requires specific findings as to credibility and clear and convincing reasons for each.

However, the ALJ has not met the clear and convincing standard to support an adverse

credibility finding. Given the complete record before the Court, Plaintiff’s credibility does

not support denial of her claim. 

Because the Court finds the treating physician’s opinion of disability is controlling and

that Plaintiff is credible, the Court need not address Plaintiff’s remaining allegations. 

VI. CONCLUSION

The Court has reviewed the Commissioner’s final decision under a substantial evidence

standard and finds that the decision denying benefits is not supported by substantial evidence.

Specifically, the ALJ made an unsupported credibility determination, gave little weight to

the opinions of Plaintiff’s treating physician, and did not adequately assess the entire record

as a whole.

Accordingly, 

IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 12) is granted. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant's Cross Motion for Summary Judgment

(Dkt. 16) is denied.

 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the case is remanded for an award of benefits.

DATED this 18th day of April, 2008.

Case 2:06-cv-02629-EHC Document 20 Filed 04/21/08 Page 14 of 14