# U ni te d S ta te s Co ur t of A pp ea ls

For the Eig hth Circu it

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _

No. 1 6- 22 82

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _

Nich ol as Deres ch uk

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pla in ti

ff - App el la nt

v.

Nan cy A. Berryhil l, Act in g C om m is si on er o f So ci al Secu rit y

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Defe nd

an t - Ap pe ll ee

__ __ __ __ __ __
App eal fro m

Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co ur t fo r th e Dis tri ct of M in ne so ta - Mi nn eap ol is

__ __ __ __ __ __

Su bm it te d: Marc h 9 , 20 17
Fil ed : J un e 2 1, 2 01 7 [Un pu bl is he d]

__ __ __ __ __ __

Befo re LOKEN, MURPHY, and BENTON, Circu it Ju dg es

.

__ __ __ __ __ __

PER CURI AM.

Nich ol as Deres ch uk was in vo lv ed in a m ot or ve hi cl e acci de nt th at in jure d hi s
ba ck in 20 0 8

, whe n he was 21 y ears ol d. He de ve lo pe d pr og res si ve hi p pa in an d

un de rwen t art hr os co pi c rig ht hi p su rg ery in Decem be r 20 10 an d art hr os co pi c le ft hi p

su rg ery in Feb ru ary 20 11

. He ap pl ie d fo r So ci al Secu rit y di sa bi li ty in su ran ce be ne fit s

an d su pp le m en ta l se cu rit y in co m e in Ju ne 20 11

, al le gi ng an on se t da te of May 1,20 10 , d ue to sc ol io si s, sp on de ot hylo si s, “ hi p pr ob le m s,” an d de pr e s s i o n

. Afte r th e

Co m m is si on er de ni ed th e ap pl ic at io n in it ia ll y an d on reco ns i d e r at io n, Deres ch uk

req ue st ed a he ari ng be fo re an A dm in is tra ti ve Law Ju dg e (ALJ) . On Ma y 24 , 20 13

, th e ALJ h el d a he ari ng at wh ic h Der es ch uk an d a vo cat io na l ex pe rt ( VE) tes ti fie d.

On Ju l y 2 5

, 2 0 13

, th e ALJ de ni ed Deres ch uk ’s ap pl ic at io n. The ALJ fo un d

th at Deres ch uk ha d se ve ral se ve re im pa irments : “ de ge ne rat iv e joi nt d i se as e of th e

hi ps bi la te ral ly; st at us -p os t bi la te ral art hr os co pi c su rg ery; rig ht kn e e s pr ai n in jury;

de ge ne rat iv e di sc di se as e of th e sp in e; m ajor de pr es si on ; an d an xi et y di so rd er.” The

ALJ fo un d th at th es e im

pa irments al on e or in co m b i n a t i o n di d no t m eet or eq ua l a

li st in g im pa irment, in cl ud in g Lis ti ng 1.0 2 fo r m ajor dysfu nc t i o n of a joi nt

, an d

Lis ti ng 12 .04 fo r affe ct iv e di so rd er. See 20 C.F.R. Part 40 4, Su bp art P, App en di x 1.

Co ns id eri ng th e en ti re ad m in is tra ti ve reco rd

, th e ALJ fo un d Deres ch uk ha d th e

res id ua l fu nc ti on al cap aci ty (RFC ) to pe rfo rm se de nt ary wor k as de fin ed in 20 C.F.R.
§§ 4 0 4

. 1 5 6 7 ( a ) an d 41 6.9 67 (a), wit h se ve ral li m it at io ns

. In reac hi ng th is RFC 1

as se ss m en t, th e ALJ fo un d th at

, al on g wit h o t h er in co ns is te nc ie s, Deres ch uk ’s

“ rep or te d act iv it ie s of da il y li vi ng , co ur se of tre at m en t, m ed ic at io n m an ag em en t, an d

cl in ic al as se ss m en ts do no t su pp or t hi s di s a b l i ng al le ga ti on s. The ev id en ce sh ows

th at [Dere sc hu k] ha s be en m an ag ed wit h a co ur se of tre at m en t, sh own im pr ov em en t

wit h ph y si cal th erap y an d po ol th erap y , an d at ti m es ha s be en no n- co m pl ia nt wit h

ta ki ng m ed ic at io ns as p res cri be d o r fo ll owi ng th ro ug h with ph y si cal th erap y .” The

ALJ no te d th at Deres ch uk ap pl ie d f o r an d rece iv ed Mi nn es ot a un em pl oym en t

The li m it at io ns were: No cl im bi ng la dd ers , ro pe s or sc affo ld s, no st an di ng or 1

wor ki ng on un ev en gr ou nd

, n o c r a w l in g, no wor k at he ig ht s or wit h ha zard s or ha zard ou s m a c h i n e r y, no pu sh in g an d pu ll in g wit h lo wer ex tre m it ie s, no po wer
gr as p i n g o r us e of ha nd to ol s or vi br at or y to ol s of th at na tu re; on ly oc cas io na l
cl im bi ng of ram

ps or st ai rs , ba la nc in g, st oo pi ng , kn eel in g, cro uc hi ng , an d ov erh ead

reac hi ng ; on ly br ie f an d su pe rfi ci al co nt ac t w i t h co wor ke rs , su pe rv is or s, an d th e
pu bl ic ; an d a ll owi ng us e o f a can e whe n a m bu la ti ng

.

-2

-be ne fit s fro m th e fo ur th qu art er of 20 10 th ro ug h th e se co nd qu art er of 20 12

, a req ue st

th at co nc ed ed he w a s “ read y an d wil li ng ” to wor k du rin g th at pe rio d. The ALJ

re je c t e d as un su pp or te d a ne ur ol og is t’s op in io n th at Deres ch uk sh ou ld av oi d

rep et it iv e wor k wit h ou ts tre tc he d arm s, a n d d i s co un te d two id en ti cal le tt ers fro m

tre at in g ph y si ci an Dr. Sacc om an , a le tt er an d m ed ic al so ur ce st at em en t (MSS) from

tre at in g ph y si ci an Dr. Xiaa j, an d a le tt er fro m tre at in g or th op ed ic su rg eo n Dr. Si erra , be cau se ob

jecti ve m ed ic al ev id en ce di d no t su p p o rt or co nt rad ic te d th e do ct or s’

ge ne ric op in io ns

. Bas ed on th e RFC fin di ng , th e ALJ fo un d th at Deres ch uk co ul d no t

pe rfo rm hi s pa st wor k as a la nd sc ap e fo rem an , fas t fo od wor ke r, ro of er, or sa le s

as so ci at e. Howev er, acce pt in g th e te st im on y of th e VE, th e ALJ fo un d th at

Deres ch uk was no t di sa bl ed be cau se he co ul d pe rfo rm se ve r al job s th at ex is t in

si gn ifi can t nu m

be rs in th e na ti on al eco no m y , su ch as po li sher

, ins pe ct or , or la m inat or

.

The ag en cy ’s App eal s Co un ci l de ni ed Deres ch uk ’s req ue st fo r rev ie w, m ak in g

th e ALJ’s de ci si on th e Co m m is si on er’s fin al de ci si on

. Deres ch uk th en fil ed th is ci vi l

act io n, al le gi ng th at th e ALJ’s de ci si on was no t su pp or te d by su bs ta nt ia l ev id en ce on

th e ad m in is tra ti v e reco rd as a who le be cau se th e ALJ erre d by (1 ) no t affo rd in g

co nt ro ll in g weig ht to th e le tt ers an d MSS fro m Deres ch uk ’s th ree tre at in g ph y si ci an s; (2 ) de te rm in in g th at Deres ch uk do es no t ha ve an im pa irmen t or co m

bi na ti on of

im pa irments th at m eet s o r med i c a l ly eq ua ls Lis ti ng 1.0 2 or Lis ti ng 12 .04 ; an d (3 )

fin di ng th a t D e r e s c h u k ha d th e RFC to pe rfo rm a li m it ed ran ge of se de nt ary wor k.

In an ex te ns iv e 67 -p ag e op in io n, th e di st ric t co ur t aff i r med t h e de ni al of be ne fit s. 2

The co ur t care fu l l y e x a m in ed each le tt er an d th e MSS an d co nc lu de d th at th e ALJ

“ pr op erl y weig he d t h e op in io ns of [Dere sc hu k’s] tre at in g pr ov id ers [g ]ive n th e

es se nt ia ll y co nc lu s o r y s t a t em en ts [in th e le tt ers ] th at [h e was ] un ab le to wor k an d

in co ns is te nc ie s wit h th e reco rd .” Fu rth er, th e co ur t fo un d su bs t a n ti al ev id en ce

The Hon or ab le Ton y N. Leu ng , Uni te d St at es Mag is tra te Jud ge fo r th e Dis tri ct 2

of Mi nn es ot a, who was de si gn at ed to de ci de th e cas e on th e m eri ts wit h th e co ns en t of th e p art ie s p ur su an t t o 2 8 U.S.C. § 63 6( c).

-3

-su pp or te d th e ALJ’s de te rm in at io n th at Deres ch u k d i d no t m eet Lis ti ng s 1.0 2 an d

12 .04 , and th e ALJ’s RFC de te rm in at io n.

On ap pe al

, Deres ch uk ar g u es th at th e ALJ’s de ci si on was no t su pp or te d by

su bs ta nt ia l ev id en c e o n th e ad m in is tra ti ve reco rd as a who le be cau se th e ALJ

co m m it te d t he th ree e rro rs he arg ue d to th e d is tri ct co ur t. “ W e rev ie w de no vo th e 3

di st ric t cou rt’s dec is io n a ffi rm in g t he ALJ’s de ni al of b en efi ts .” Ig o v. Co lv in

, 83 9

F.3 d 72 4, 72 8 (8 th Ci r. 20 16 ). After care fu ll y rev ie win g t he ad m in is tra ti ve reco rd

,

we co nc lu de th at su bs ta nt ia l ev id en ce su pp or ts th e ALJ’s de ci si on an d affi rm fo r th e

reas on s s ta te d i n t he di st ric t co ur t’s t ho ro ug h o pi ni on . See 8 th Cir . Rul e 4 7B

.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __

Deres ch uk arg ue s fo r th e f i r st ti m e in hi s rep ly br ie f th at th e VE erre d in 3

te st ifyin g th at Deres ch uk ha s th e RFC to pe rfo rm two types of se de nt ary wor k th e VE
id en ti fie d be cau se th e D i ct io na ry of Occu pa ti on al Tit le s rat es th os e job s as li gh t

wor k. Abs en t so m e reas on fo r fai li ng to rai se an is su e in th e op en in g br ie f, “ we wil l

no t con si de r an is su e fi rs t ra is ed in a rep ly br ie f.” Uni te d Stat es v. Darde n, 70 F.3 d
15 07 , 15 49 n.1 8 (8 th Cir . 19 95 ), cert . den ie d, 5 17 U.S. 11 49 (19 96 ).

-4

-