[DO N OT PUBLISH] IN THE UN ITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELE VENTH CIRCUIT

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ No. 1 2- 10 70 3 Non -Arg um en t Ca le nd ar
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ D.C. Dock etNo. 6 :1 0- cv -0 14 78 -GAP-KRS JASON S. SM ITH, Pl ai nt iff -Ap pe ll an t, ve rs us COMM ISSI ONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defen da nt -Ap pe ll ee.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

th e Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co urt forth e Mi dd le Dis tri ctof F lo rid a

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ (Au gu st15 , 20 12 ) Befo re MAR CUS, WILSON, an d F AY, Circ ui t J ud ge s. PER CURI AM: Ja so n S m ith app eal s the adm in is tra ti ve law ju dg e’s (“ ALJ”) de ni al of h is Case: 12-10703 Date Filed: 08/15/2012 Page: 1 of 6cl ai m s fo r di sabi li ty ins ur an ce b en efi ts an d s up pl em en ta l s ecu rit y in co m e und er Tit le s II an d XVI o f th e So ci al Securit y Act. Th e ALJ fo un d t ha t Sm ith s uf fere d fro m th e se ve re i m

pa irments of o be si ty, as th m a, an d b ip ol ar d is or de r, an d t ha t h e was m od erat el y

li m it edinhi s ab il ity

to m ai nt ai n h is co nc en tra ti on , per si st en ce, an d p ace. No ne th el es s, the ALJ d et erm in edth atSm ith c ou ldpe rfo rm si m pl e, ro ut in e, an d re pe ti ti ve tas ks . Con si de rin g S m ith’s re si du al fun ct io na l capa ci ty, th e ALJ co nc lu de d t ha t Sm ith was no t d is ab le d b ecau se he co ul d p erfo rm hi s p as t rel ev an t wo rk . On ap pe al , Smith a rg ue s tha t the ALJ fai le d t o s pe ci fic al ly accou nt fo r hi s m od erat e li m it at io ns when ass es si ng hi s re si du al fun ct io na l capa ci ty and ab il ity to work . After acare fu l re vi ew of th e adm in is tra ti ve reco rdan d t he pa rti es ’ br ie fs , we affi rm

th e ALJ’s d en ia l o f di sabi li ty ins ur an ce b en efi ts an d supp le m en ta l s ecu rit y

in co m e. W e rev ie w th e ALJ’s d eci si on to en sure i t i s s up po rte d b y subs ta nt ia l ev id en ce an d t ha t i t i s b as edup on th e p ro pe r le ga l s tand ard s. W in sc he l v. Co mm’r of So c. Se c. , 63 1 F .3d11 76 , 11 78 (11 th Cir . 20 11 ). “ Subs ta nt ia l ev id en ce i s m or e th ana sc in ti ll a an d i s s uc h re le va ntev id en ce as a reas on ab le pe rs on wou ldacce pt as ad equa te to supp ort a c on cl us io n.” Id. (in te rn al qu ot at io n m ark s o mitte d) . If th e ALJ’s fi nd in g i s s up po rte d b y subs ta nt ia l ev id en ce, we m us t d eferto itev enif th e ev id en ce p rep on de rat es ag ai ns t the fin di ng . Cr aw fo rd v. Co mm’r o

f S oc . Sec . , 2 Case: 12-10703 Date Filed: 08/15/2012 Page: 2 of 636 3 F .3d11 55 , 11 58 –5 9 (1 1t h C ir. 2 00 4) (pe r cu ria m). “ W e m ay no t d eci de th e fact s an ew, rewei gh th e ev id en ce, o r subs ti tu te ou r jud gm en t fo r th atof t he Co m m is si on er.” W

in sc he l , 63 1 F .3dat 1 17 8 (a lt erat io ns an d i nt ern al qu ot at io n m ark s o mit te d) . Eli gi bi li ty for d is ab il ity

in su ran ce b en efi ts an d s up pl em en ta l s ecu rit y in co m e requi res th atth e cl ai m an t b e d is ab le d. 4 2 U.S.C. § 42 3( a)(1 )(E) (d is ab il ity in su ran ce b en efi ts ); Id. § 1 38 2( a)(1 )– (2 ) (s up pl em en ta l s ecu rit y in co m e). A

* cl ai m an t s ha ll be co ns id ereddi sabl edif h e is un ab le to en ga ge insubs ta nt ia l ga in fu l ac ti vi ty by

reas on of am ed ic al ly det erm in ab le im pa irment t ha t ca n b e ex pe ct edto res ul t i n d eath o r whi chha s l as te d o r canbe expe ct edto las t fo r a co nt in uo us pe rio d o f atlea st12 m on th s. Id . §§ 42 3( d) (1 )(A), 1 38 2c (a)( 3) (A). The cla im an t b ears th e b ur de n o f pr ov in g h is di sabi li ty. Ell is on v. Barnh ar t , 35 5 F.3 d 1 27 2, 1 27 6 (1 1t h C ir. 2 00 3) (pe r cu ria m). Inord er t o d et erm in e whe th er a cl ai m an t i s d is ab le d, the So ci al Securit y Adm in is tra ti on ap pl ie s a 5 -s te p s eque nt ia l ev al ua ti on . 20 C.F.R. § § 4 04 .15 20 (a), 41 6.9 20 (a). Th is pro ces s i nc lu de s an an al y si s o f whe th er the cla im an t: (1) is un ab le to en ga ge insubs tant ia l g ai nf ul act iv ity ; (2 ) ha s a s ev ere m ed ic al ly The de finition of disability and the test used to de termine whe ther a person ha s a * disability is the same for

claims seekingdisability insurance benef

its or supplemental security income. 3

Case: 12-10703 Date Filed: 08/15/2012 Page: 3 of 6de te rm in ab le ph y si cal or m en ta l i m pa irment tha t m eet s the durat io n re qu ire m en ts ; (3 ) ha s an im

pa irment t ha t m eet s o r equa ls anim pa irment l is te d i n t he reg ul at io n an d t ha t m eet s the du rat io n re qu ire m en ts ; (4 ) can pe rfo rm hi s p as t re le va ntwork , in li gh t o f hi s re si du al fun ct io na l capa ci ty; an d (5 ) can m ak e anad jus tm en t t o ot he r work, i n l ig htof h is res idua l fu nc ti on al cap aci ty, ag e, educ at io n, an d wo rk ex pe rie nc e. Id. §§ 40 4.1 52 0( a)(4 ), 41 6.9 20 (a)( 4) . A cla im an t wh o c anpe rfo rm hi s p as t re le va ntworkis no t d is ab le d. Id. §§ 40 4.1 56 0( b) (3 ), 41 6.9 60 (b )(3 ). Whe n d et erm in in g wh ethe r a cl ai m an t ca n pe rfo rm hi s p as t re le va ntwork , th e ALJ fi rs t d et erm in es th e cl ai m an t’s re si du al func ti on al cap aci ty. Id. §§ 40 4.1 52 0( e), 4 16 .92 0( e). “ The res idua l func ti on al cap aci ty is an ass es sm en t, b as edup on all of t he rel ev an t ev id en ce, o f a cl ai m an t’s rem ai ni ng ab il ity

to do workde sp it e h is im pa irments .” Lewis v. C

al la ha n , 12 5 F.3 d 1 43 6, 1 44 0 (1 1t h C ir. 1 99 7) (ci ti ng 20 C.F.R. § 40 4.1 54 5( a)(1 )); se e a ls o 20 C.F.R. § 41 6.9 45 (a)( 1) . Sm ith h as pu ll edlan gu ag e fro m ou r op in io n i n W

in sc he l , 63 1 F .3dat 1 17 6, to form hi s ar gu m en t. W

in sc he l pre se nt eda qu es ti on co nc ern in g t he an al y si s at st ep fiv e o f th e se qu en ti al ev al ua ti on . One way an ALJ ca n m ak e h is de te rm in at io n o f whe th er a s ig ni fic an t n um be r of job s ex is t i n t he na ti on al eco no m y is by con su lt in g avo cat io na l ex pe rt. Id. at11 80 . But“ ‘[i]n ord er fo r a 4 Case: 12-10703 Date Filed: 08/15/2012 Page: 4 of 6vo cat io na l ex pe rt’s t es ti m on y to co ns ti tu te subs ta nt ia l ev id en ce, the ALJ m us t po se a hypo th et ic al qu es ti on whi chco m pr is es all of the cla im an t’s i m pa irments .’ ” Id. (qu ot in g W

il so n v . Barnh ar t , 28 4 F .3d12 19 , 12 27 (11 th Cir . 20 02 ) (p er cu ria m)). W e co nc lu de d t ha t the ALJ’s de ci si on in W in sc he l di d n otco ns ti tu te subs tant ia l ev id en ce b ecau se th e h y po th et ic al po se d d idno t ac co un t fo r th e co nc lu si on s m ad e atearl ie r st ep s wi th res pe ctto li m it at io ns inco nc en tra ti on , pe rs is te nc e, an d p ace. Id. at11 81 . Sm ith re as on s tha t i f th e Co m m is si on er i n W in sc he l arg ue d t ha t anALJ’s hypo th et ic al di d n otne edto acco un t fo r li m it at io ns fo un d at s te ps two an d t hr ee, the n t he Co m m is si on er h ere m

us t h av e al so in st ru ct edth e ALJ t o i gn or e th e sam e li m it at io ns when de te rm in in g t he ab il ity to pe rfo rm pa strel ev an t wo rk . Ourch arac te riz at io n o f th e Co m m is si on er’s arg um en t i n W in sh el is no t in st ru ct iv e o n t he qu es ti on of wh ethe r th e ALJ h ere c on si de redSmith’s m od erat e li mit at io ns inco nc en tra ti on , per si st en ce, o r pa ce. A rev ie w of the reco rdin di cat es th atth e ALJ d idco ns id er the se li m it at io ns . Whe n e xp la in in g h is de ci si on at s te p fo ur , th e ALJ s ta te d t ha t h e d idco ns id er the Psychi atric Rev ie w Tech ni qu e, whi ch reco rd edSm ith’s m od erat e li m it at io ns inco nc en tra ti on , per si st en ce, an d p ace. Bu t whe n S m ith’s l im it at io ns were co ns id eredalo ng si de th e res t o f th e ev id en ce i n t he reco rd , th e ALJ d et erm in edth atSm ith’s s ta te m en ts co nc ern in g the in te ns ity , 5 Case: 12-10703 Date Filed: 08/15/2012 Page: 5 of 6pe rs is te nc e, an d l im it in g e ffec ts of h is cla im edsym pt om s wer e n oten ti rel y cred ib le . Subs tant ia l ev id en ce s up po rts th e ALJ’s d eci si on . In p art ic ul ar, Dr. Grah am ex am in edSm ith a ndno te d tha t dur in g t he ex am in at io n S m ith d idno t h av e pr ob le m s wi th att en ti on , con cen tra ti on , or re cen t m em ory is su es . There were n o be ha vi or al in di cat io ns of anx ie ty, de pr es si on , or o f a tho ug htdi so rd er. St at e ps y ch ol og ic al co ns ul tant s b el ie ve d S m ith was cap ab le of s im pl e, ro ut in e, an d rep et it iv e work. Th e ex am in at io n c on du ct edby D r. Barb er was ess en ti al ly un rem ark ab le an d i nd ic at eda cap aci ty for wo rk -rel at edact iv it ie s. In de ed , Sm ith freque nt ly vol un te eredat Hab it atforHum an ity . The ALJ re li edup on a co m pl et e res idua l fu nc ti on al cap aci ty ass es sm en t, an d s ub st an ti al ev id en ce s up po rts th e co nc lu si on th atinli gh t o f Sm ith’s re si du al fun ct io na l capa ci ty, Sm ith c anpe rfo rm hi s p as t re le va ntwork . Sm ith i s n oten ti tl edto di sabi li ty ins ur an ce b en efi ts or supp le m en ta l s ecu rit y

in co m e. AFFIRMED .

6 Case: 12-10703 Date Filed: 08/15/2012 Page: 6 of 6