FILED U.S. COURT OF AP P EALS E LEVEN T HC IRC UIT MARCH 12, 2008 THOMAS K. KAH

N CLERK [ DO NO T P UB L I S H]

I N THE UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT

________________________ N o. 07- 12960 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ D . C . D ocketN o. 06 -016 82 -C V -J F G -M J O Y C E B A R C L A Y , P la in tif f - A p p e lla n t, v ersu s C O M M I S S I O N E R O F S O C I A L S E C U R I T Y A D M I N I S T R A T I O N , D e f e n d a n t- A p p e lle e .

________________________ A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f o rth e N o rth e rn D i s tr i c to f A l ab a ma

_________________________ ( M ar c h 12, 2008) B efo re A N D E R S O N , B L A C K an d H U L L , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M:2

J oy c e B a r c l a y appe a l s the di s tr i c tc ourt ’ s or de ra f f i rm i ng the C o m m is s io n e r ’s d e n ia l o f s o c ia l s e c u r ityd is ab ilityb e n e f its , 4 2 U .S .C . § 4 0 5 ( g ) . B a r c l a y a s s e rt s s i x i s s u e s o n ap p e a l , wh i c h we a d d r e s s i n tu rn . Af t e rr e v i e w, we a f f irm th e C o m m is s io n e r ’s d e n ia l o f b e n e f its . I . STA N D A R D O F R EVI EW W e r ev iew a s o cial se cu rity ca se to d eter m in e w h eth erth e C o m m issio n er ’s deci si on i s s up po rt ed by subst ant i al evi dence and w hether the corre ctl egal s ta n d a r d s w e r e ap p lie d . L e w is v . Cal lahan , 1 2 5 F .3 d 1 4 3 6 , 1 4 3 9 ( 1 1 th C ir . 1 9 9 7 ) .

“ S ubs t a nt i a l e vi de nc e i s de f i ne d a s m or e tha n as c i nt i l l a , i . e . , e vi de nc e tha tm us tdo m ore than creat e asuspi ci on of the exi st ence of the fa ctt o b e e st abl i shed, and such r e l e va nte vi de nc e a s ar e a s onabl e pe r s on w oul d a c c e pta s a de qua t e t o s upportthe concl usi on . ” Foo te v . Cha ter , 6 7 F . 3 d 1 5 5 3 , 1 5 6 0 ( 1 1 th C i r . 1 9 9 5 ) . We r e v i e w de no vo th e d is tr ic t c o u rt’s d e te rm in a tio n r e g a r d in g r e m a n db a s e d o n n e w e v id e n c e . Cherr y v . H ec kler , 7 6 0 F .2 d 1 1 8 6 , 1 1 9 4 ( 1 1 th C ir . 1 9 8 5 ) .

I I . DI S CUS S I ON A . D is c r e di t i ng D r . U f f ord’s m e di c al

opi ni on B a r c la y f

ir s t c o n te n d s th e A d m in is tr a tiv e L a w J u d g e ( A L J ) e rr e d in di s c r e di t i ng the m e di c a l opi ni on of he rtr e a t i ng phy s i c i a n, D r . U f f or d. “ [ T ] he o p i n i o n o f a treat i n g p h ysi ci an i s en t i t l ed t o su b st an t i al w ei g h tu n l ess g o o d cau se3

exi st s f or no theedi ng the tre at i ng ph ys i ci an’ s di agno si s. ” E dw ards v . Sul l i v an , 93 7 F . 2d 58 0, 58 3 (11 th C i r. 19 91 ). W e have hel d “ go od cause” exi st s w here the: (1) tre at i ng ph ys i ci an’ s opi ni on w as no tbo l st er ed by the evi dence; (2) e vi dence s upport e d ac ontr a ry f

i ndi ng; or( 3) tr e a t i ng phy s i c i a n’ s opi ni on w a s c onc l us ory or in c o n s is te n t w ith th e d o c to r ’s o w n m e d ic a l r e c o r d s . L e w is , 125 F . 3d a t1440 (i n t ern al q u o t at i o n s an d ci t at i o n s o m i tt ed ). If th e A L J d i sreg ard s o r acco rd s l ess w e ig h t to th e o p in io n o f atr e a tin g p h y s ic ia n , th e A L Jm u s t c le a r lya rtic u la te h is r e a s o n s , a n d th e f

a ilu r e to d o s o is r e v e r s ib le e rr o r . M acG rego r v . B ow en , 786 F . 2d 10 50 , 10 53 (11th C i r. 19 86 ). G ood c aus e e xi s t e d f

orthe A L Jt o di s c r e di tD r . U f f or d' s f i ndi ngs , a nd the A L Jc le a r lya rtic u la te d s p e c if ic r e a s o n s f

o rr e je c tin g h is o p in io n , n a m e ly , th a t it w as i ncon si st entw i th h i s ow n tre atm entno t es and u nsup po rt ed by the m edi ca l evi dence. A l tho ug h D r. U ff ord p re pare d tw o separ at e s t at em ent s opi ni ng B ar cl ay w as di sabl ed and u nabl e t o w ork, no thi ng i n h i s tre atm entno t es or the m edi ca l r e c o r d s th r o u g h D e c e m b e r3 1 , 2 0 0 2 , in d ic a te B a r c la yis p r e c lu d e d f r o m w o rk in g . I n a d d itio n , th e r e c o r d s h o w s th e A L Ja tte m p te d to o b ta in a d d itio n a l r e c o r d s to s h o w tr e a tm e n t f

o rth e b a c kp a in p r io rto D e c e m b e r3 1 , 2 0 0 2 , a n d n o n e w e r e in exi st ence . F urther, the fi rs tdo cum enti n the re cord thatD r. U ff ord p re pare d that s ta te s B a r c la y is d is ab le d f a ils to s ta te a n yd a te a s to th e o n s e t o f d is ab ility , a n d is4

da t e d O c t obe r14, 2003, m or e tha n t e n m onths a f t e rB a r c l a y ' s l a s tda t e of in s u r ab ility . T h e s e c o n d s ta te m e n t p r e p a r e d b yD r . U f f o r d w ith r e g a r d to B a r c la y 's d is ab ilityis d a te d M a y 8 , 2 0 0 6 , a n d s ta te s th e o n s e t o f d is ab ilitya s " a t le a s t 3 y e a r s . " A ga i n, thi s w oul d i ndi c a t e B a r c l a y ' s di s abl i ng c ondi t i on be ga n a r ound M a y o f 2 0 0 3 , m o r e th a n f

iv e m o n th s a f

te rh e rla s t d a te o f

in s u r ab ility . T h e A L J 's deci si on t o d i sc ou ntD r. U ff ord' s opi ni on w as there fore supp ort ed by subst ant i al evi dence. B . Fin d in gth a t B a r c la y ’s a lleg a tio n s o

f d is a b ilityw e r e n o t c r e d ib le B ar clay n ex t ass er ts th e A L J e rr ed in fin d in g th at b o th h eran d h erh u sb an d ’s subj ec t i ve al l egat i on s of di sabi l i ty w er e notcr edi bl e. W e have es t abl i shed a three pa rtt e s ttha tappl i e s w he n ac l a i m a nta tt e m pt s t o de m ons tr a t e di s abi l i tythr ough h e ro w n te s tim o n y o f

p a in o ro th e rs u b

je c tiv e s y m p to m s . H

ol t v . Sul l i v an , 921 F . 2d 1221, 1223 ( 11th C i r . 1991) . T he t e s tr e qui r e s tha tthe c l a i m a nte s t abl i s h: (1) e vi dence of an und er l yi ng m edi ca l cond i t i on and ei ther ( 2) obj e c t i ve m e di c a l e vi de nc e tha tc onf i rm s the s e ve r i tyof

the a lle g e d p a in a r is in g f

r o m th a t c o n d itio n o r( 3 ) th a t th e o b je c tiv e ly de t e rm i ne d m e di c a l c ondi t i on i s of s uc h as e ve r i tytha ti tc a n be r e a s o n ab lye x p e c te d to g iv e r is e to th e a lle g e d p a in . I d. “ I f the A L Jde c i de s nott o c r e di ts uc h t e s t i m ony , he m us ta rt i c ul a t e e xpl i c i ta nd a de qua t e r e a s ons f

ordoi ng s o. F a i l ur e t o a rt i c ul a t e the r e a s ons f ordi s c r e di t i ng s ubj e c t i ve pa i n t e s t i m ony r e qui r e s , a s am a tt e rof l a w , tha tthe t e s t i m ony be5

ac ce pt ed as true. ” I

d. ( c i t a t i on om i tt e d) . I n r e j e c t i ng ac l a i m a nt ’ s s ubj e c t i ve te s tim o n y , th e A L Jn e e d n o t s p e c if ic a llyr e f e rto e v e ryp ie c e o f

e v id e n c e in h is de c i s i on, “ s o l ong a s the A L J ’ s de c i s i on . . . i s notabr oa d r e j e c t i on w hi c h i s not enou gh t o enabl e the di stri ctcourtor [us] t o con cl ud e thatthe A L J c on si dere d h er m edi ca l cond i t i on as a w ho l e. ” D yer v. B a rn h a rt , 39 5 F . 3d 12 06 , 12 11 (11th C i r. 2005) ( quot a t i ons a nd a l t e r a t i ons om i tt e d) . I n a ddi t i on, “ the A L Js houl d s t a t e the w e ig h t h e a c c o r d s to e a c h ite m o f im p a irm e n t e v id e n c e a n d th e r e a s o n s f o rh is de c i s i on t o a c c e ptorr e

j e c ttha te vi de nc e , i nc l udi ng a l l t e s t i m ony pr e s e nt e d a tthe

. . . hear i ng . . . . ” L uc as v . Sul l i v an , 91 8 F . 2d 15 67 , 15 74 (11th C i r. 19 90 ). T h e A L J a rticu lated ex p li cit an d ad eq u ate r ea so n s f o r d iscr ed it in g B ar clay ’s and h erhu sband' s s ubj ec t i ve t es t i m on y, nam el y, thather m edi ca l re cords w er e i ncon si st entw i th d i sabi l i ty on o r bef ore D ec em ber 31, 20 02 . F urther, the st at ed r e a s o n s a r e s u p p o rte d b yth e r e c o r d . F ir s t, th e f in d in g s o f

D r s . W ils o n a n d A rn o ld a r e notm a t e r i a l t o the r e l e va ntt i m e pe r i od. S e c ond, the m e di c a l e vi de nc e a s of D ecem b er 3 1 , 2 0 0 2 , sh o w ed B arcl ay su ffered fro m ch ro n i c asth m at i c b ro n ch i t i s; t oba c c o abus e ; na s a l a i rw a y obs truc t i on s e c onda ryt o na s a l s e pt a l de vi a t i on; c hr oni c urt i c a r i a/hi ve s ; a nxi e ty ; a nd r e c urr e ntur i na rytr a c ti nf e c t i ons , butnone of th e s e im p a irm e n ts w e r e d is ab lin g o rw e r e o f s u c h s e v e r ityth a t th e yc o u ld re as on abl y c ause di sabi l i ty. A s di sc usse d abo ve, there w as a l ac k o f m edi ca l6

evi dence i n the re cord t o sho w the exi st ence of an un derl yi ng di sabl i ng m edi ca l c o n d itio n o n o rb e f

o r e h e rla s t d a te o f

in s u r ab ility . T h u s , th e A L J 's d e c is io n to di sc re di tthe t es t i m on y of B ar cl ayand h erhu sband w as supp ort ed by subst ant i al e v id e n c e . C . Fi ndi ng B ar c layhad f ai le d to s how s he s uf

f e r e d f r om a m e ntal

i m pai rm e nt unde rL is t i ngs 12. 04 and 12. 06 B a r c l a y ne xtc ont e nds the A L Je rr e d i n f i ndi ng s he ha d f

a i l e d t o s how s he s uf f e r e d f r om am e nt a l i m pa i rm e ntunde rL i s t i ngs 12. 04 a nd 12. 06. T he c l a i m a nt h a s th e b u r d e n o f

p r o v in g a n im p a irm e n t m e e ts o re q u a ls alis te d im p a irm e n t. B arr on v . Sul l i v an , 9 2 4 F .2 d 2 2 7 , 2 2 9 ( 1 1 th C ir . 1 9 9 1 ) . “T o ‘m e e t’ aL is tin g , a cl ai m antm usthave a di agno si s i ncl ud ed i n the L i st i ng s and m ustprov i de m edi ca l r e port s doc um e nt i ng tha tthe c ondi t i ons m e e tthe s pe c i f i c c r i t e r i aof

the L i s t i ngs and the du ra t i on re qu i re m ent . ” W i l so n v. B a rn h a rt , 28 4 F . 3d 12 19 , 12 24 (11th C i r. 2 0 0 2 ) . L is tin g 1 2 .0 4 p r o v id e s th a t ac la im a n t is d is ab le d if s h e h a s as u f

f ic ie n tly s e ve r e “ di s turba nc e of

m ood, a c c om pa ni e d byaf ul l orpa rt i a l m a ni c orde pr e s s i ve s y ndr om e . ” 20 C . F . R . § 404, S ubpt . P , A pp. 1, L i s t i ng 12. 04. L i s t i ng 12. 06 p r o v id e s th a t ac la im a n t is d is ab le d if s h e s u f f e r s f r o m a n x ie tya n d th a t “a n x ie tyis e ith e rth e p r e d o m in a n t d is tu rb a n c e o rit is e x p e r ie n c e d if th e in d iv id u a l a tte m p ts to m a s t e rs y m pt om s ; f

ore xa m pl e , c onf

r ont i ng the dr e a de d obj e c tors i tua t i on i n a7

phobi c di s or de rorr e s i s t i ng the obs e s s i ons orc om pul s i ons i n obs e s s i ve c om pul s i ve di s or de r s . ” 20 C . F . R . § 404, S ubpt . P , A pp. 1, L i s t i ng 12. 06. T he r e w e r e thr e e m e nt a l he a l th r e port s done on B a r c l a y , none of w hi c h s how tha tB a r c l a y m e tL i s t i ngs 12. 04 or12. 06. T he f i r s tr e portw a s done byD r . W a rr e n, a s t at e a gency psy chol og i st , w ho re vi ew ed the re cords f or the peri od of O ct ob er 31, 1996, t o D e c e m be r , 31, 2002, a nd opi ne d the yw e r e nots uf f i c i e ntt o r a t e the s e ve r i ty of

B a r c l a y ' s c ondi t i on pr i ort o he rl a s tda t e of i ns ur abi l i ty . T he s e c ond r e p o rt w a s b y D r . W ils o n , alic e n s e d p s y c h o lo g is t, w h o e v a lu a te d B a r c la yo n J u ly 23 , 20 03 . A l tho ug h D r. W i l son o pi ned B ar cl ayhad a “ cl i ni ca l l y s i gn i fi cantl evel of depres si on and anx i ety, ” and there w as a “ cl ose r el at i on shi p b etw ee n h er d e p r e s s io n , h e ra n x ie ty , a n d h e rs o m a tic c o n c e rn s ,” h is r e p o rt s ta te d C la im a n t's

“ ps y c hol ogi c a l s t a tus a tthi s t i m e m a ke s i thi ghl yunl i ke l ytha ts he c oul d f unc t i on i n a nytype of

oc c upa t i ona l s e tt i ng. ” T hi s r e porti s notr e l e va ntt o the t i m e pe r i od before D ec em ber 31, 20 02 . T he thi rd re po rt , do ne by D r. A rnol d, concl ud ed B a r c l a y pe r f

orm e d a c t i vi t i e s of

da i l yl i vi ng i nde pe nde nt l y , m a i nt a i ne d s i gni f i c a nt rel at i o n sh i p s, an d co n tri b u t ed t o m ai n t ai n i n g th e h o u seh o l d . D r. A rn o l d al so com pl et ed a M edi ca l S ou rc e O pi ni on F orm (M ent al ) i n w hi ch she s t at ed B ar cl ay h a d m o d e r a te lim ita tio n s in th e f o llo w in g a r e a s : ( 1 ) r e s p o n d in g ap p r o p r ia te lyto s upe rvi s or s ; ( 2) r e s pondi ng appr opr i a t e l yt o c us t om e r s orothe rm e m be r s of the8

ge ne r a l publ i c ; ( 3) de a l i ng w i th c ha nge s i n ar out i ne w ork s e tt i ng; a nd ( 4 ) m a in ta in in g s o c ia l f

u n c tio n in g . I n a ll o th e ra r e a s o f f u n c tio n in g , D r . A rn o ld f ound tha tB a r c l a y ha d m i l d orno l i m i t a t i ons . T he r e c or ds f r om D r . U f

f or d, a l though the y s t a t e B a r c l a y s uf f e r s f r om a nxi e ty , do notc ont a i n e nough in f o rm a tio n to c o n c lu d e B a r c la y m e t a n yo f th e c r ite r iao f

th e L is tin g s . S i nce B ar cl ayfa i l ed t o p rodu ce any m edi ca l re cords s ho w i ng she s uffe re d fro m an y d i sab i l i ty u n d er th e m en t al L i st i n g s p ri o r t o D ecem b er 3 1 , 2 0 0 2 , h er l ast dat e of i nsurabi l i ty, the A L J di d n oterr i n con cl ud i ng thatB ar cl ayhad n otm ether b u r d e n . D . P os i ng an i nc om

ple te hy pothe t i c al

que s t i on to the v oc at i onal ex pe r t i n that it fa ile d to in c lu de a ll h e rs u b

je c tiv e c o m

p la in ts B ar cl ayfurther a ss ert s the A L J e rr ed i n p osi ng an i ncom pl et e hypothet i ca l q u e s tio n to th e v o c a tio n a l e x p e rt ( V E ) in th a t th e h yp o th e tic a l f a ile d to in c lu d e a ll her s ubj ec t i ve com pl ai nt s. In order for aV E ’ s t es t i m on y t o con st i tut e s ub st ant i al evi dence thata c l ai m antcan p er form other w ork, “ the A L J m ustpo se a hypo thet i ca l qu es t i on w hi ch com pri se s a l l of the cl ai m ant ’ s i m pai rm ent s. ” Jones v. Apf el , 19 0 F . 3d 12 24 , 12 29 (11th C i r. 19 99 ). H ow ever , the A L J i s notre qu i re d to in c lu d e f

in d in g s in th e h yp o th e tic a l th a t th e A L Jh a s f o u n d to b e u n s u p p o rte d . Craw f ord v. C om m ’rof

So c. Sec. , 36 3 F . 3d 11 55 , 11 61 (11th C i r. 20 04 ).9

T he A L Jf

ound tha tB a r c l a y ' s r e s i dua l f unc t i ona l c apa c i ty( R F C ) , on or be f or e D e c e m be r31, 2002, di d notpr e ve nthe rf r om pe r f orm i ng l i ghtw ork. T he A L Ja s k e d th e V E to : [ a ]s s u m e f

o ru s a n in d iv id u a l w h o is lim ite d to lig h t w o rkw ith av o i d an ce o f co n cen trat ed ex p o su re t o t em p eratu res, w etn ess, h u m i d i ty, sh o u l d av o i d ev en m o d erat e ex p o su re t o fu m es, o d o rs, gase s, po or vent i l at i on , pl us the i nd i vi du alw ou l d h ave the addi t i on al n o n -ex ert i o n al l i m i t at i o n s d u e t o a m en t al i m p ai rm en to r i m p ai rm en t s, a s o u tlin e d in th e c ap a c itys ta te m e n t, f u n c tio n a l c ap a c itys ta te m e n t in E xhi bi t7F . . . [ w ] oul d s uc h a n i ndi vi dua l be abl e t o pe r f orm the j ob of a debon er , saw hand or se w i ng m ac hi ne op er at or? A s di s c us s e d above , the A L Jdi d note rri n f i ndi ng B a r c l a y ' s s ubj e c t i ve c om pl a i nt s i n e xi s t e nc e on D e c e m be r31, 2002 w e r e di s pr oport i ona t e t o the m e d ic a l e v id e n c e a n d n o t f u llyc r e d ib le . T h e q u e s tio n p o s e d to th e V E in c lu d e d a ll th e R F C th e A L Jf

o u n d to b e s u p p o rte d b yth e m e d ic a l e v id e n c e in th e r e c o r d . A c c or di ngl y , the A L J ' s de c i s i on nott o i nc l ude tha tB a r c l a yc oul d notdo a nytype o f w o rk , a n d to o m it B a r c la y 's s u b je c tiv e c o m p la in ts o f

p s y c h o lo g ic a l p r o b le m s in th e h yp o th e tic a l to th e V E is s u p p o rte d b ys u b s ta n tia l e v id e n c e . Se e i d. E . T he Appe al

s C ounc i l

e rr e d i n f

ai l i ng to r e m and he rc as e f orc ons i de r at i on of new ev i dence B arcl ay assert s th e A p p eal s C o u n ci l (A C ) erred i n fai l i n g t o rem an d h er case f o rc o n s id e r a tio n o f

n e w e v id e n c e u n d e r2 0 C .F .R . § 4 0 4 .9 7 0 ( b ) . T h e A C “m u s t c ons i de rne w , m a t e r i a l , a nd c hr onol ogi c a l l yr e l e va nte vi de nc e a nd m us tr e vi e w the10

c a s e if th e a d m in is tr a tiv e la w ju d g e ’s a c tio n , f in d in g s , o rc o n c lu s io n is c o n tr a ry to the w ei gh tof the evi dence curr ent l y of r ec ord. ” Ingram v. C om m ’rof So c. Sec. A dm i n. , 4 9 6 F . 3 d 1 2 5 3 , 1 2 6 1 ( 1 1 th C i r . 2 0 0 7 ) ( q u o t a t i o n s o m i tt e d ) . Wh e n th e AC r e f u s e s to c o n s id e rn e w e v id e n c e s u b m itte dto it a n d d e n ie s r e v ie w , th a t d e c is io n is a ls o s u b je c t to ju d ic ia l r e v ie w b e c au s e it a m o u n ts to a n e rr o ro f la w . Kee ton v. D ep ’t o f H ea l th a n d H u m a n Servs. , 21 F . 3d 10 64 , 10 66 (11th C i r. 19 94 ). W hen r e v ie w in g th e A C ’s d e n ia l o f r e v ie w , w e m u s t “lo o ka t th e p e rtin e n t e v id e n c e to d et erm i n e i f th e ev i d en ce i s n ew an d m at eri al , th e k i n d o f ev i d en ce th e A C m u st consi der i n m aki ng i t s dec i si on w hether t o revi ew an A L J’ s dec i si on . ” Fal ge v. A p f e l, 1 5 0 F .3 d 1 3 2 0 , 1 3 2 4 ( 1 1 th C ir . 1 9 9 8 ) . T h e r e c o r d r e f

le c ts th e A C c o n s id e r e d th e e v id e n c e B a r c la ys u b m itte d in de c i di ng nott o r e vi e w he rc a s e , a nd f ound tha ti tdi d notpr ovi de aba s i s f or c ha ngi ng the A L J ' s de c i s i on. T he A C s pe c i f i c a l l ys t a t e d i t" c ons i de r e d the r e a s ons [ B a r c l a y ] di s a gr e e [ d] w i th the de c i s i on a nd the a ddi t i ona l e vi de nc e l i s t e d on the e n c lo s e d O r d e ro f

A p p e a ls C o u n c il." T h u s , th e A C d id n o t e rrb yf a ilin g to c o n s id e rth e n e w e v id e n c e . I n a d d itio n , th e A C d id n o t e rrin d e c lin in g to r e v ie w th e A L J 's d e c is io n in l i gh tof the evi dence s ub m i tt ed because the evi dence w as no tm at er i al . T he re cord s how s the a ddi t i ona l e vi de nc e w hi c h B a r c l a ys ubm i tt e d c ons i s t e d of the f ol l ow i ng:11

(1 ) resu l t s o f an M R I o f th e l u m b ar sp i n e d o n e i n M ay 2 0 0 6 sh o w i n g sm al l d i sc bul ge s a tL 2- 3 a nd L 4- 5, ( 2) D r . U f f or d' s of f i c e r e c or ds da t e d S e pt e m be r2, 2004, t o M ay 1 2 , 2 0 0 6 , sh o w i n g th atB arcl ay so u g h ttreatm en tfo r v ari o u s co m p l ai n t s, i nc l udi ng r e s pi r a t ory pr obl e m s , C O P D , ba c k pa i n, ne rve s , a nd s houl de rpa i n, ( 3) D r . U f

f or d' s s oc i a l s e c ur i ty que s t i onna i r e da t e d M a y8, 2006, w he r e i n he i nd i ca t ed he had seen B ar cl ayon "over ahu nd re d v i si t s" and thatshe had been di s abl e d f

or" a tl e a s tthr e e y e a r s " due t o " s e ve r e C O P D a nd l um ba rde ge ne r a t i ve di sc di se as e w i th chron i c l ow back pai n, " and (4) r ec ords of D r. M atthew B er chuck da t e d J une 12, 2006, t o J ul y 16, 2006, s how i ng he di a gnos e d B a r c l a yw i th a herni at ed di sc atL 4-5 and perf orm ed a r i gh tL 4-5 l am i no t om y di skec t om y. S i nce a ll o f th e s e m e d ic a l r e c o r d s p e rta in to atim e a f te rD e c e m b e r3 1 . 2 0 0 2 , B a r c la y 's l a s tda t e of

i ns ur abi l i ty , the A C di d note rrbyc onc l udi ng tha tthe w e i ghtof the e v id e n c e w a s n o t c o n tr a ry to th e A L J 's d e c is io n . F. T he dis tr i c t

c our t e rr e d i n f

ai l i ng to r e m and the c as e f orr e c ons i de r at i on of new m edi cal

ev i dence F i nal l y, B ar cl aycont ends the di stri ctcourterre d i n fai l i ng t o rem and h er c a s e f o rr e c o n s id e r a tio n o f

n e w m e d ic a l e v id e n c e u n d e r4 2 U .S .C . § 4 0 5 ( g ) .

“ S e c t i on 405( g) pe rm i t s adi s tr i c tc ourtt o r e m a nd a n appl i c a t i on f orbe ne f i t s t o the C om m i ss i on er. . . by tw o m etho ds, w hi ch ar e c om m on l y denom i nat ed ‘ se nt ence four re m ands’ and ‘ se nt ence si x rem ands . . . . ’ ” I ngr am , 49 6 F . 3d at12 61 . W hen12

ac l a i m a nts ubm i t s ne w e vi de nc e t o the A C , ar e vi e w i ng c ourtm us tc ons i de rthe e nt i r e r e c or d, i nc l udi ng the e vi de nc e s ubm i tt e d t o the A C , t o de t e rm i ne w he the rthe d e n ia l o f b e n e f its w a s e rr o n e o u s . I

d. a t1262. R e m a nd i s appr opr i a t e w he n a di stri ctcourtfa i l ed t o con si der the re cord as a w ho l e, i ncl ud i ng evi dence s ub m i tt ed for the fi rs tt i m e t o the A C , i n d et erm i ni ng w hether the C om m i ss i on er ’ s f i nal d e c is io n is s u p p o rte d b y s u b s ta n tia l e v id e n c e . I d. at12 66 -67. T he new evi dence m us tr e l a t e ba c k t o the t i m e pe r i od on orbe f or e the da t e of

the A L J ’ s de c i s i on. 20 C .F .R . § 4 0 4 .9 7 0 ( b ) . A s e n te n c e f

o u rr e m a n d is ap p r o p r ia te w h e n “e v id e n c e p r o p e r lyp r e s e n te d to the A ppe a l s C ounc i l ha s be e n c ons i de r e d bythe C om m i s s i one ra nd i s pa rtof the adm i ni stra t i ve re cord. ” I ngr am , 4 9 6 F .3 d a t 1 2 6 9 . A r e m a n d u n d e rs e n te n c e s ix is “ap p r o p r ia te w h e n th e d is tr ic t c o u rt le a rn s o f e v id e n c e n o t in e x is te n c e o ra v a ilab le t o the c l a i m a nta tthe t i m e of the a dm i ni s tr a t i ve pr oc e e di ng tha tm i ghtha ve changed the ou t com e of thatproceedi ng . ” I d. a t 1 2 6 7 ( q u o ta tio n s o m itte d ) . B a r c l a y s u b m i tt e d n e w e v i d e n c e f o rth e f i r s tt i m e t o th e AC , wh i c h th e AC c ons i de r e d, a nd i tbe c a m e pa rtof the a dm i ni s tr a t i ve r e c or d, thus , the onl yba s i s f or r e m a n d in g h e rc a s e w o u ld b e as e n te n c e f o u rr e m a n d , n o t as e n te n c e s ix r e m a n d . T he r e c or d de m ons tr a t e s the di s tr i c tc ourtc ons i de r e d the e vi de nc e s ubm i tt e d by B ar cl ayt o the A C w hen con cl ud i ng thatthe deci si on of the C om m i ss i on erw as13

s upport e d by s ubs t a nt i a l e vi de nc e . A s di s c us s e d e a r l i e r , the di s tr i c tc ourtdi d not e rri n f i ndi ng the e vi de nc e w a s notm a t e r i a l be c aus e i tdi d notr e l a t e t o the r e l e va nt t i m e p eri o d . T h erefo re, th e d i stri ctco u rtd i d n o terr i n refu si n g t o rem an d th e case u n d e rs e n te n c e f

o u r . Se e I

ngr am , 1 2 6 6 - 6 7 . I I I . CONCL US I ON T h e A L J d idn o t errin d iscr ed it in g b o th th e d isab il ity o p in io n o f B ar clay ’s tr e a tin g p h y s ic ia n a n d B a r c la y ’s a lle g a tio n s o f d is ab ility , a n d d id n o t e rrin de t e rm i ni ng tha tB a r c l a yf a i l e d t o pr e s e ntm e di c a l e vi de nc e tha ts he m e tthe re qu i re m ent s of di sabi l i ty und erthe L i st i ng s. In addi t i on , i n l i gh tof her d e te rm in a tio n th a t s u b s ta n tia l e v id e n c e s u p p o rte d th a t B a r c la yh a d th e R F C to perf orm l i m i t ed, un ski l l ed l i gh tw ork, the A L J di d n otpo se an i m prop er hypo thet i ca l t o the V E . F i nal l y, because the new m edi ca l evi dence di d n otre nd er th e A L J ’s d e c is io n c o n tr a ry to th e w e ig h t o f th e r e c o r d , th e A C d id n o t e rrin denyi ng re vi ew and ref

usi ng t o rem and. L i kew i se , because thi s new evi dence w as no tm at er i al , the di stri ctcourtdi d n oterr i n ref usi ng t o rem and the ca se un der s e n t e n c e f

o u ro f 4 2 U . S. C. § 4 0 5 ( g ) . A c c o r d i n g l y , w e a f f i rm. A FFI R M ED .