Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-05-01908/USCOURTS-ca8-05-01908-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Jo Anne B. Barnhart
Appellee
Jonathan V. Koenig
Appellant

Document Text:

1

The Honorable James M. Rosenbaum, Chief Judge, United States District

Court for the District of Minnesota, adopting the report and recommendations of the

Honorable Susan Richard Nelson, United States Magistrate Judge for the District of

Minnesota. 

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 05-1908

___________

Jonathan V. Koenig, *

*

Appellant, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* District of Minnesota.

Jo Anne B. Barnhart, Commissioner *

of Social Security Administration, * [UNPUBLISHED]

*

Appellee. *

___________

Submitted: June 19, 2006

Filed: June 27, 2006

___________

Before ARNOLD, BYE, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Jonathan V. Koenig appeals the district court’s1

 order affirming the denial of

supplemental security income (SSI). In an October 2000 application, Koenig alleged

disability from, inter alia, back pain, adult attention deficit hyperactivity disorder

(ADHD), and depression. After a hearing, where Koenig was counseled, an

Appellate Case: 05-1908 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/27/2006 Entry ID: 2061450
-2-

administrative law judge (ALJ) found that Koenig’s impairments--L5/S1 degenerative

joint disease, adult ADHD, depression, and longstanding personality problems--were

severe, but not of listing-level severity either alone or combined; his allegations as to

limitations were not fully credible; he had the residual functional capacity (RFC) to

perform a significant range of light work, and his mental disorders did not preclude

the performance of unskilled work; and he could perform jobs a vocational expert

(VE) had identified in response to a hypothetical. On appeal Koenig generally argues

that the record established his entitlement to SSI. Having carefully reviewed the

record, we affirm. See Guilliams v. Barnhart, 393 F.3d 798, 801 (8th Cir. 2005)

(standard of review). 

To the extent Koenig is challenging the credibility findings, the ALJ gave

multiple valid reasons for his findings. See id. at 801 (deference warranted where

ALJ’s credibility determination is supported by good reasons and substantial

evidence). Koenig appears to argue that because diagnostic test results showed a

herniated disc moderately compressing a nerve root, the record established disability,

but we disagree. Cf. Dolph v. Barnhart, 308 F.3d 876, 880 (8th Cir. 2002) (while

there is little doubt claimant has pain, issue is whether pain is so severe as to be

disabling). 

We also reject Koenig’s apparent attempt to challenge the ALJ’s RFC findings

and the VE’s testimony. The RFC findings--and thus the ALJ’s hypothetical to the

VE--were consistent with the opinions of the treating physicians and a consulting

psychologist, as well as the RFC findings of the Social Security Administration

medical reviewers; and, as noted above, Koenig was properly discredited. See Stormo

v. Barnhart, 377 F.3d 801, 807 (8th Cir. 2004) (in determining RFC, ALJ should

consider medical records, observations of treating physicians and others, and

claimant’s description of his limitations); Hunt v. Massanari, 250 F.3d 622, 625 (8th

Cir. 2001) (hypothetical is sufficient if it sets forth impairments supported by record

and accepted as true by ALJ). Koenig contends on appeal that the jobs the VE

Appellate Case: 05-1908 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/27/2006 Entry ID: 2061450
-3-

identified are not available in his area, but he provides no evidence to support this

contention. 

Koenig’s remaining arguments provide no basis for reversal. Accordingly, we

affirm. 

______________________________

Appellate Case: 05-1908 Page: 3 Date Filed: 06/27/2006 Entry ID: 2061450