# U ni te d S ta te s Co ur t of A pp ea ls For the Eig hth Circu it

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ No. 1 4- 16 40

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _
Don na Ly

nn Henr y

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

ff - App el la nt

v.

Caro lyn W . Col vi n, Act in g C omm is si on er, So ci al Secu rit y Adm in is tra ti on

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 Weste rn Dis tri ct of Ark an sa s - F t. Sm it h

__ __ __ __ __ __ Su bm it te d: Nov em

be r 21 , 20 14 Fi le d: Decem

be r 4, 2 01 4 [Un pu bl is he d]

__ __ __ __ __ __ Befo re WOL LMAN, BYE, and MELLOY, Circu it Ju dg es

.

__ __ __ __ __ __
PER CURI AM.Don na Ly nn Hen ry a p p eal s th e di st ric t co ur t’s or de r affi rm in g th e de ni al of 1 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. Upo n de no vo

rev ie w, we ag ree wit h th e di st ric t co ur t th at th e ad m in i s t r a t i v e la w ju dg e’s (ALJ’s) de ci si on is su pp or te d by su bs ta nt ia l evi de nc e on th e rec or d a s a wh ol e. See Owen s

v

. C o l vi n, 72 7 F.3 d 85 0, 85 1 (8 th Ci r. 20 13 ). Sp eci fic al ly, co nt rary to H e n r y’s

as se rti on s on ap pe al
, th e ALJ’s c r e d i b il it y de te rm in at io n is en ti tl ed to de fere nc e be cau se it is ba se d on se ve ral va li d reas on s, se e McDa de v. Ast ru e, 72 0 F.3 d 99 4, 99 8 (8 th Ci r. 20 13 ); th e ALJ pr op erl y di sc ou nt ed th e RFC op in io ns of two tre at in g ph y si c ia ns , se e Perk in s v. Ast ru e, 64 8 F.3 d 89 2, 89 7- 98 (8 th Ci r. 20 11 ) (tr eat in g ph y si ci an ’s op i n i o n do es no t au to m at ic al ly co nt ro l); Dav id so n v. Ast ru e, 50 1 F.3 d 98 7, 99 0- 91 (8 th Ci r. 20 07 ) (tr eat in g ph y si cian’ s opi ni on is pr op erl y di sc ou nt ed whe n it is in co ns is te nt wit h ph y si ci an ’s own tre at m en t no te s) ; Hen ry fai le d to m eet he r bu rd en o f e s t a b l i sh in g m or e li m it at io ns th an th os e fo un d by th e ALJ in hi s RFC de te rm in at io n, whi ch we r e c o ns is te nt wit h th e m ed ic al ev id en ce, se e Mar ti se v. Ast ru e, 64 1 F.3 d 90 9, 92 3 (8 th Ci r. 20 11 ) (cl ai m an t be ars b u rd en of pe rs ua si on to
pr ov e di sa bi li ty an d de m on st rat e RFC; RFC is m ed ic a l q u es ti on so it m us t be

su pp or te d by so m e m ed ic al ev id en ce); an d be cau se th e ALJ’s hypo th et i c a l t o th e

vo cat io na l ex pe rt en co m pa ss ed al l of Hen ry ’s pr ov en im pa irments
, th e vo cat io na l

ex pe rt’s res po ns e to th e hypo th et ic al co ns ti tu te d su bs ta nt ia l ev id en ce, s e e Bu ck ne r v. Astrue , 64 6 F .3d54 9, 5 60 -6 1 (8 th Cir . 20 11 ). The ju dg m en t o f th e di st ric t cou rt is affi rm ed

.

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

The Hon or ab le P.K. Hol m es , III, Ch ie f Ju dg e, Uni te d St at es Dis tri ct Co ur t fo r 1 th e W es te rn Dis tri ct of Ark an sa s, ad op ti ng th e rep or t an d reco mm e nd at io ns of th e Hon or ab le Erin Set se r, Uni te d St at es Mag is tra te Ju dg e fo r th e W es te rn Dis tri ct of Ark an sa s.

-2

-