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

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

No. 1 5- 12 40

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ Bryce Mab ry

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 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 Eas te rn Dis tri ct of Ark an sa s - J on es bo ro

__ __ __ __ __ __

Su bm it te d: Sep te m

be r 22 , 20 15 Fil ed : M arch 3, 2 01 6

__ __ __ __ __ __

Befo re WOL LMAN, COLLOTON , and KELLY , Cir cu it Ju dg es

.

__ __ __ __ __ __

KELLY, Cir cu it Ju dg e.

Bryce Mab ry ap pe al s th e m ag is tra te jud ge ’s or de r affi rm in g th e de ni al of hi s 1

ap pl ic at io ns fo r di sa bi li ty in su ran ce be ne fi ts (D IB ) an d su pp le m en ta l se cu rit y in co m e

The Hon or ab le Je ro m e T. Kearn ey , U n i t e d St at es Mag is tra te Ju dg e fo r th e 1
Uni te d St at es Dis tri ct Co ur t fo r th e East ern D i s t r i c t of Ark an sa s, to who m th e cas e

was su bm it te d b y

co ns en t o f th e p art ie s u nd er 2 8 U.S.C. § 63 6( c).( SSI) , a fte r a he ari ng be fo re an ad m in is tra ti ve la w ju dg e (ALJ). On ap pe al , M ab r y

arg ue s th at th e ALJ’s d e t e r mi n at io n th at hi s m en ta l im pa irments on ly li m it hi m to

un sk il le d wor k is no t su pp or te d b y s u b s t an ti al ev id en ce on th e reco rd as a who le

. Hav in g ju ris di ct io n u nd er 2 8 U.S.C. § 12 91 , we affi rm

.

I. Ba ck gr ou nd

On Mar ch 22

, 20 11

, Mab ry fil ed ap pl ic at io ns fo r bo th DIB an d SSI, cl ai m in g he was un ab le to wo r k du e to a co m bi na ti on of im

pa irments in cl ud in g pa ran oi d

sc hi zo ph ren ia

, d ep res si on , an xi et y wit h pa ni c at ta ck s, an d m or bi d ob es it y

. Mab ry

gr ad ua te d fro m hi gh sc ho ol an d at te nd ed on e se m es te r of co ll e g e , bu t dr op pe d ou t
du e to de pr es si on an d an xi et y

. He h a s w o r ke d as a co ok in a bo wli ng al le y , a

ro of er/ he lp er, a farm wor ke r, an d a pr ep arat io n co ok

. He la st wor ke d in Mar ch 20 11

.

As su pp or t fo r hi s cl ai m , Mab ry pr es en te d ex te ns iv e m ed ica l ev ide nc e sh owi ng th at he was tre at ed on a c o n t i n ui ng ba si s fro m 20 04 th ro ug h 20 12 at Mi d- So ut h

Heal th Sy st em s (Mi d- So ut h)

, th e lo cal m en ta l he al th faci li ty. The ev id e n ce de m on st rat ed ho sp it al iz at io ns fo r ps y ch ot ic or su ic id al be ha vi or in 20 04 , 2 00 6 an d

20 07

, tre at m en t wit h se ve ral di ffer en t a nt i-p sycho ti c, an ti -d ep res sa nt
, an d

an ti -an xi et y m ed ic at io ns , an d on go in g in di vi du al th erap y

. Med ic al rep or ts in di cat ed

Mab ry was m ak in g pro gr es s bu t on Apr il 16

, 20 11 , he wen t t o t he em erg en cy ro om wit h co m pl ai nt s of an x i e t y, de pr es si on , an d su ic id al th ou gh ts

. He was di ag no se d

wit h su ic id al th o u g ht s, gi ve n an ti -d ep res si on , an ti -an xi et y , an d an ti -p sycho ti c

m ed ic at io ns , an d rel eas ed

. Al t h o u g h th e no te s fro m Mab ry ’s ne xt two in di vi du al

th erap y se ss io ns no te d in crea se d de pr es si on an d su ic id al id eat io n, by May 12

, 20 11

, th e no te s sh owe d co nt in ue d pr og res s, al be it at ti m es “ sl ig ht ,” an d Mab ry rep or te d hi s

m ed ic at io ns se em ed to he lp

. Not es fro m Decem be r 15

, 20 11

, i n d i c at ed th at he

di sc us se d job -s eek in g st rat eg ie s wit h hi s th erap is t, an d hi s m ed ic al reco rd s from 20 12

sh owe d he was do in g be tt er ov eral l an d rep or te d no ha ll uc in at io ns , de lu si on s, or

su ic id al id eat io n.

-2

-On J un e 6 , 20 11 , at th e req ue st of th e So ci al Secu rit y Adm in is tra ti on , Mab ry

un de rwen t a co ns ul ta ti ve ex am in at io n wit h Dr. Sam ue l Hes te r. Dr. Hes te r di ag no se d

Mab ry wit h sc hi zo affe ct iv e di so rd er an d m or bi d ob es it y

. Dr. Hes te r st at ed th at
Mab ry “ is no t li ke ly to be ab le to co pe wit h th e typic al m en ta l de m an ds of wor k- li ke

ta sk s.” Dr. Hes te r fu rth er co nc lu de d, ho wev er, th at Mab ry h a d t h e c a pa ci ty to

co m pl et e ta sk s wit hi n an acce pt ab le ti m e fram e if he co ul d m ot iv at e hi m se lf to at te nd

wor k a nd th at hi s p sycho si s ap pe ared to be co nt ro ll ed wit h m ed ic at io n.

On Ju ne 9

, 2 0 11

, Dr. Kay Gale

, a st at e ps y ch ia tri c co ns ul ta nt
, rev ie wed

Mab ry ’s m ed ic al re c o r d s an d co nc lu de d th at Mab ry co ul d pe rfo rm si m pl e, ro ut in e,

rep et it iv e ta sk s in a se tt in g w h e r e in te rp ers on al co nt act is in ci de nt al to wor k

pe rfo rm ed an d su pe rv is io n is si m pl e, di rect
, an d co nc ret e. Thi s as se ss m en t was affi rm ed on Ju ne 21

, 20 11

, by Dr. Pau la Ly nc h, an ot he r st at e ag en cy m ed ic al

co ns ul ta nt , who als o re vi ewed Mab ry ’s m ed ic al reco rd s.

The Co m m is si on er de ni ed Mab ry ’s cl ai m s in it ia ll y an d up on reco ns id erat io n. Afte r hi s cl ai m s were de ni ed

, th e ALJ he ld a di sa bi li ty d e t e r mi n a t i on he ari ng on Aug us t 22

, 20 12

, at whi ch Mab ry an d a vo cat io na l ex pe rt (VE) te st ifi ed

. Mab ry was 2

rep res en te d by co un se l at th e he ari ng

. In res po ns e to a hypo th et ic al fro m th e ALJ, th e
VE te st ifi ed th at a pe rs on wit h Mab ry ’s li m it at io n s c o u l d pe rfo rm Mab ry ’s pa st

un sk il le d wo rk as a farm wor ke r an d p rep co ok . In ad di ti on , th e VE tes ti fie d t ha t a

pe rs on wit h Mab ry ’s li m it at io ns co ul d pe rfo rm ot he r un sk il le d wor k su ch as an of fic e cl ean er an d o ffi ce h el pe r. The ALJ de ni ed Mab ry ’s di sa bi li ty app li cat io n.

At th e he ari ng , Mab ry am en de d hi s on se t da te fo r d i s a b i li ty to Ja nu ary 15

, 2
20 10

.

-3

-II . Disc us si on

W e rev ie w de no vo a di st ric t co ur t’s de ni al of so ci al se cu rit y be ne fit s. Jo hn so n

v. Co lv in

, 78 8 F.3 d 87 0, 87 2 (8 th Ci r. 20 15 ). In so do in g, “ ‘[w] e do no t rewei gh th e

ev id en ce pr es en te d to th e ALJ,’ an d we de fer to th e ALJ’s de te rm in at io ns reg ard in g th e cred ib il it y of te st im on y , as lo ng as th os e de te rm in at io ns are su pp or te d by go od

reas on s an d su bs ta nt ia l ev id en ce.” Id

. (q uo ti ng Gon zal es v. Barn ha rt, 46 5 F.3 d 89 0,

89 4 (8 th Ci r. 20 06 )). “ Su bs ta nt ia l ev id en ce is rel ev an t ev id en ce whi ch a reas on ab le

m in d wou ld acce pt as ad eq ua te to su pp or t th e Co m m is si on er’s c o nc lu si on .” Id

. ( q u o t at io n om it te d)

. “ W e m ay no t rev ers e th e Co m m is si on er’s de ci si on m erel y be cau se su bst anti al ev id en ce ex is ts in th e reco rd th at wou ld ha ve su pp or te d a co nt rary

ou tc om e.” Hag ga rd v. Ap fel , 17 5 F .3d 59 1, 5 94 (8t h C ir. 1 99 9)

.

The ALJ ev al ua te d Mab ry ’s cl ai m acco rd in g to th e fiv e-s te p se qu en ti al

ev al ua ti on pr oc es s es ta bl is he d by th e So ci al Secu rit y Adm in is tra ti on

. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 40 4.1 52 0, 41 6.9 20 ; se e al so Hack er v. Barn ha rt, 45 9 F.3 d 93 4, 93 6 (8 th Ci r.
20 06 ). At th e fir st st ep , th e A LJ f o u n d th at Mab ry ha d no t en ga ge d in su bs ta nt ia l

m ean in g fu l em

pl oym en t si nc e Ja nu ary 15

, 20 10

. At st ep two
, th e ALJ fo un d th at
Mab ry ha d se ve re im

pa irments of sc hi zo affe ct iv e di so rd er, de pr es si on , an d pa ni c

a t t ack s, bu t at st ep th ree fo un d th at th es e m ed ic al im pa irments di d no t m eet th e cri te ria in th e Lis ti ng s of Im pa irments

. See 20 C.F.R. Pt

. 40 4, Su bp t. P, App

. I. The

ALJ de te rm in ed at st ep fo ur th at Mab ry ha d th e Res id ua l Fu nc ti on al Cap aci ty (RFC ) 3

to “ pe rfo rm a fu ll ran ge of wor k at al l ex ert io na l le ve ls wit h th e fo ll owi ng

no ne xe rti on al li m it at io ns : [Ma br y ] is li m it ed to si m ple

, ro uti ne , re peti ti ve ta sk s whe re in te rp ers on al co nt act is on ly in ci de nt al to th e wor k pe rfo rm ed an d su p e r v i s io n is

si m pl e, di rect
, an d co nc ret e.” Mab ry as se rts th at th e ALJ’s RFC de te rm in at io n at st ep

An RFC is th e m os t a cl ai m an t can do de sp it e hi s or he r li m it at io ns

. Pear sa ll 3

v. Mas sa na ri, 27 4 F.3 d 12 11

, 12 17 (8 t h C i r

. 20 01 ); 20 C.F.R. §§ 40 4.1 54 5( a)(1 ), 41 6.9 45 (a)( 1)

.

-4

-fo ur , whi ch th e ALJ in co rp or at ed in to hi s hypo th et ic al qu es ti on to th e VE at st ep fiv e,

is no t s up po rte d b y

su bs ta nt ia l ev id en ce i n t he reco rd

.

Mab ry as se rts th e ALJ’s RFC ass es sm en t do es no t adeq ua te ly acco un t for all

th e li m it at io ns he su ffer s d u e t o th e co m bi na ti on of pa ran oi d sc hi zo ph ren ia

, pa ni c

at ta ck s, an d ch ro ni c de pr es si on

. “ The RFC m us t (1 ) gi ve ap pr op ria te co ns id erat io n

to al l of [th e cl ai m an t’s] i mp a i r ment s, an d (2 ) be ba se d on co m pe te nt m ed ic al

ev id en ce es ta bl is hi ng th e ph y si cal an d m en ta l act iv it y th at th e cl ai m an t can pe rfo rm in a wor k se tt in g.” Part ee v. Ast ru e, 63 8 F.3 d 86 0, 8 6 5 ( 8 t h C i r. 20 11 ) (in te rn al

qu ot a t i o n s o mi t te d)

. “ Bec au se a cl ai m an t’s RFC is a m ed ic al qu es ti on , an ALJ’s

as se ss m en t of it m

us t be su pp or te d by so m e m ed ic al ev id en ce of th e cl ai m an t’s ab il it y

to fu nc ti on in th e wor kp la ce.” Co x v. Ast ru e, 49 5 F.3 d 61 4, 61 9 (8 th Ci r. 20 07 ). An

A LJ m ay al so co ns id er th e cl ai m an t’s su bjec ti ve st at em en ts ab ou t hi s cap ab il it ie s.
Part ee, 63 8 F .3d at 86 5. The RFC de te rm in at io n “ is ul ti m at el y an ad m in is tra ti ve de te rm in at io n res erv ed to th e Co m m is si on er.” Co x, 49 5 F.3 d at 61 9– 20 (ci ti ng 20

C.F.R. §§ 41 6.9 27 (e)( 2)

, 41 6.9 46 ). The cl ai m an t ha s th e bu rd en to es ta bl is h hi s RFC.

Pear sa ll , 27 4 F .3d at 1 21 7.

Mab ry arg ue s th at th e ALJ di sr eg ard ed hi s vo lu m i n o u s Mi d- So ut h m ed ic al

r e c or ds

, whi ch in cl ud e ho sp it al iz at io ns fo r ps y ch ot ic or su ic id al be ha vi or in 2 0 0 4

, 20 06

, an d 20 07

. He as se rts th at th e m ed ic al reco rd he su bm it te d sh ows he ha s be en 4

The Co m m is si on er ur ge s us to di sr eg ard Mab ry ’s m ed ic al ev id en c e d at ed 4
be fo re Ja nu ary 15

, 20 10

, arg ui ng th at th is ev id en ce can no t be us ed to sh ow di sa bi li ty du rin g th e rel ev an t ti m e pe rio d of Ja nu ary 15

, 20 10

, th ro ug h Sep te m be r 20

, 20 12

. Mab ry f il ed a pr io r cl ai m , whi ch was de ni ed wit ho ut fu rth er ap pe al on Ja nu ary 14

, 20 10

. W hi le ev id en ce su bm it te d an d c o n s i d e red by an ALJ in a pr io r pr oc eed in g

can no t be co ns id ered as ne w e v i d e n c e in th is pr oc eed in g, it can be co ns id ered as “b a c kg ro un d fo r ne w an d ad di ti on al ev id en ce of de te rio rat in g m en ta l or ph y si cal

co nd it io ns oc cu rri ng aft er th e pr io r pr oc eed in g.” Hil li er v. So c. Sec. Adm in

., 48 6 F.3 d 35 9, 36 5 (8 th Ci r. 20 07 ) (q uo ta ti on om it te d)

. Mo reo ve r, m ed ic al ev id en ce da te d be fo re th e ALJ’s pr io r de ci si on bu t no t co ns id ered in th e pr io r pr oc eed in g co ns ti tu te s

-5

-tre at ed wit h se ve ral di ffer en t a nt i-p sycho ti c, an ti -d ep res si on , an d an ti -an xi et y

m ed ic a t i o n s , wit h va ry in g res ul ts
, an d ha s co nt in ue d to ha ve su ic id al th ou gh ts an d

pa ni c at ta ck s. Mab ry co nt en ds th at th e on ly m ed ic al ev i d e n c e i n th e reco rd 5

su pp or ti ng th e ALJ’s RFC as se ss m en t cam e fro m no n- ex am in in g st at e ag en cy do ct or s.

Our rev ie w sh ows th at th e ALJ di d no t rel y so le ly on th e op in io ns of th e st at e

ag en cy do ct or s an d su ffi ci e nt ly co ns id ered th e m ed ic al reco rd s pr ov id ed by Ma br y in as se ss in g Mab ry ’s R FC. The ALJ reco gn iz ed th at Mab ry ha s si gn ifi can t ment al

im pa irments

, fin di ng th em se ve re at st ep two of th e an al y si s. W hi le Mab ry ’s m ed ic al

reco rd s sh ow th at Mab ry ’s m en ta l he al th ha s flu ct ua te d— e s pe ci al ly in th e y ears be twee n 20 04 an d 20 10 —t he tre at m en t no te s fro m Feb ru ary 20 10 th ro ug h Ju ne 20 12

rev eal th at Mab ry ’s m en ta l he al th ha d st ab il iz ed to a cert ai n de gr ee an d he was

m ak in g pr og res s. Dur in g 20 12

, he rep or te d no de lu si on s, ha ll uc in at io ns , or su ic id al

i de at io n. The st at e ag en cy ph y si ci an s’ op in io ns were co ns is te nt wit h t h e o t h e r

m ed ic al ev id en ce an d it was pr op er fo r th e ALJ to rel y on th em , in pa rt, in

fo rm ul at in g Mab ry ’s RFC. See St or m o v. Barn ha rt, 37 7 F.3 d 80 1, 80 7– 08 (8 th Ci r.

ne w ev id en ce an d can be co ns id ered

. Id

. at 36 4– 6 5

. The Co m m is si on er ha s no t id en ti fie d wha t p a r t s of Mab ry ’s m ed ic al ev id en ce were co ns id ered in a pr io r pr oc ee d i n g , n o r ha s sh e co nv in ced us th at th e earl ie r ev id en ce is no t rel ev an t as ba ck gr ou nd as to Mab ry ’s cu rren t m en ta l im p a i r men t s

. As a res ul t, we de cl in e to li m it ou r co ns id erat io n o f th e ev id en ce i n t he reco rd

.
Mab ry co nt en ds th at th e ALJ erre d by co ns id eri ng t h e la ck of wor k- rel at ed 5

res tri ct io ns pl aced on hi m by his m ed ic al pro vi de rs be cau se no ne of t he m ha d b een

as ke d fo r th ei r op in io n. “ A tre at in g do ct or ’s si le nc e on th e cl ai m an t’s wor k cap aci ty do es no t co ns ti tu te su bs ta nt i a l ev id en ce su pp or ti ng an ALJ’s [RFC de te rm in at io n] whe n th e do ct or was no t as ke d to ex pr es s an op in io n on th e m at te r an d di d no t do so .”
H ut se ll v. Mas sa na ri, 25 9 F.3 d 70 7, 71 2 (8 th Ci r. 20 01 ). Our rev ie w of th e r e c o r d sh ows th at
, al th ou gh th e ALJ m en ti on e d th at Mab ry ’s tre at in g ph y si ci an s ha d no t pl aced res tri ct io ns on hi m , th e RFC ass es sm en t was no t b as ed on th is fact or alo ne

.

-6

-20 04 ) (t he ALJ p ro pe rly us ed ev id en ce fro m st at e ag en cy

do ct or s i n s up po rti ng th e fin di ng th at th e cl ai m an t’s m en ta l i m pa irments were n ot di sa bl in g)

.

Mab ry al so co nt en ds th at th e ALJ fai le d to co ns id er Dr. Hes te r’s op in io n th at
Mab ry wou ld be un li ke ly to be ab le to co pe wit h th e typic al m en ta l de m an ds of ba si c

wor k- li ke ta sk s. The ALJ is no t req u i r ed to acce pt ev ery op in io n gi ve n by a

co ns ul ta ti ve ex am in er, ho wev er, bu t m us t weig h all th e ev id en ce in th e reco rd

. See

B r a ch te l v. Apf

el

, 13 2 F.3 d 41 7, 42 0 (8 th Ci r. 19 97 ). The in te rp ret at io n o f ph y si ci an s’ fin di ng s is a fact ua l m at te r le ft to th e A LJ ’s au th or it y

. See Cl ay v.
Barn ha rt, 41 7 F.3 d 92 2, 93 0 (8 th Ci r. 20 05 ). In t h is cas e, m os t of Dr. Hes te r’s

op in io ns an d fin di n g s a r e c on si st en t wit h th e ALJ’s RFC as se ss m en t. Dr. Hes te r ob se rv ed th at Mab ry was co op erat iv e, al ert
, an d or ie nt ed

. Dr. Hes te r n o t ed th at
Mab ry sh owe d no de lu si on s or ha ll uc in at io ns a n d c ou ld co m m un ic at e in a so ci al ly

ad eq ua te
, in te ll ig ib le an d e ffec ti ve m an ne r. Dr. Hest er was als o of the op in io n th at
Mab ry co ul d su st ai n pe rs is te nc e an d co nc en tra ti on an d fin is h ta sk s in an acce pt ab le

ti m e fram e if pr op erl y m ot iv at ed

. The ALJ di d co ns id er Dr. Hes te r’s st at em en t th at
Mab ry li ke ly wou l d n o t be ab le to co pe wit h th e typic al m en ta l de m an ds of ba si c

wor k- li ke ta sk s, bu t si m

pl y co nc lu de d it was in co ns is te nt wit h th e res t of th e do ct or ’s

own rep or t. See Per ks v. Ast ru e, 68 7 F.3 d 10 86

, 10 92 (8 th Ci r. 20 12 ) (ALJ m ay di sc ou nt a ph y si ci an ’s op in io n i f th e o pi ni on is in te rn al ly inc on si st en t).

The ALJ al so co ns id ered Mab ry ’s Glo ba l Ass es sm en t of Fu nc ti on in g (GAF) 6

sc o r e s, m os t of whi ch were in th e m id -5 0’s in 20 10 th ro ug h 20 12

, bu t fo un d th e

The GAF is a nu m eri c sc al e us ed to r a t e s o c ia l, oc cu pa ti on al

, an d 6

ps y ch ol og ic al fu nc ti on in g “ on a hypo th et ic al co nt in uu m of m en t a l-h eal th il ln es s.” Pat e-Fi res v. Ast ru e, 56 4 F.3 d 93 5, 93 7 n.1 (8 th Ci r. 20 09 ) (q uo ti ng Diag no st ic an d S t a t is ti cal Man ua l of Men ta l Dis or de rs 32 (4 th ed

. Am

. Ps y ch ia tri c Ass ’n 19 9 4 ) (DSM- IV)). The sc al e ran ge s from zero to on e hu nd red

. Id

. W e no te th at th e m os t

rece nt ed it io n of th e DSM di sc on ti nu ed u s e o f th e GAF sc al e. See Diag no st ic an d St at is ti cal Man ua l o f Men ta l Di so rd ers 16 (5t h e d. Am . Psychi at ric Ass ’n 20 13 ).

-7

-sc or es were “ no t co nt ro ll in g.” GAF sc or es m ay be rel ev an t to a de te rm in at io n of

di sa bi li ty ba se d on m en ta l im pa irments

. See Pat e-Fi res , 56 4 F.3 d at 94 4– 45

. Bu t “ an
ALJ m ay affo rd gr eat er weig ht to m ed ic al ev id en ce an d te st im on y th an to GAF sc or es whe n th e ev id en ce req ui res it .” Jo ne s v. Ast ru e, 61 9 F.3 d 96 3, 97 4 (8 th Ci r. 20 10 ) (q uo ta ti on om it te d)

. In th is cas e, th e ALJ care fu ll y co ns id ered th e sc or es bu t fo un d

th ey co nf li ct ed wit h ot he r ob

ject i v e med ic al ev id en ce in th e reco rd

, in cl ud in g th e cl in ic al ob se rv at io ns of Mab ry ’s tre at in g ph y si ci an s, who no te d con ti nu ed pr og res s

pa rti cu la rly in 20 10 th ro ug h 20 12

. In an y ev en t, Mab ry ’s sc or es are co ns is te nt wit h

th e ALJ’s fin di ng th at Mab ry ha s m od erat e li m it at io ns in act iv it ie s of da il y li vi ng an d

m ai nt ai ni ng so ci al fu nc ti on i n g , co nc en tra ti on , p ers is te nc e, or pa ce. See Halv ers on

v. Ast ru e, 60 0 F.3 d 92 2, 93 1 (8 th Ci r. 20 10 ) (a hi st or y of GAF sc or es of be twee n 52

an d 6 0 was co ns is te nt wit h a fin di ng of m od erat e li m it at io ns ).

The ALJ al so co nc lu de d th at Mab ry ’s sym pt om s were reas on ab ly co nt ro ll ed by m ed ic at io n an d tre at m en t. “ If an im pa irment can be co nt r o l l e d by tre at m en t or

m ed ic at io n, it can no t be co ns id ered di sa bl in g.” Bro wn v. Ast ru e, 61 1 F.3 d 94 1, 95 5 (8 th Ci r. 20 10 ) (q uo ta ti on om it te d)

. On th e ot he r ha nd

, we reco gn iz e th at “ ‘[i]t is

in he ren t in ps y ch ot ic il ln es se s th at pe rio ds of rem is si on wil l oc cu r,’ an d th at su ch

rem is si on do es no t m ean th at th e di sa bi li ty ha s ceas ed .” And le r v. Ch at er, 10 0 F.3 d

13 89

, 13 93 (8 th Ci r. 19 96 ) (q uo ti ng Mi ll er v. Heck le r, 75 6 F.2 d 67 9, 68 1 n.2 (8 th Ci r.
19 85 ) (p er cu ria m )). Bec au se in di vi du al s wit h a men t a l il ln es s m ay ex pe rie nc e

pe rio ds du rin g whi ch th ey are rel at iv el y sym pt om -fre e, th ei r le ve l of fu nc ti on in g can

va ry si gn ifi can tl y ov er ti m e. See 20 C.F.R. Pt

. 40 4, Su bp t P, App

. 1, § 12 .00 (D). In
ad di ti on , m ed ic at io ns m ay ha ve ad ve rs e si de effe ct s th at m ay affe ct a pe rs on ’s ab il it y

to fu nc ti on in th e wor k p la ce. See 20 C.F.R. Pt . 40 4, Su bp t P, App . 1 , § 12 .00 (G).
Here, ho wev er, th e ALJ ex pr es sl y co n s i d ered th e lo ng it ud in al ev id en ce, an d

de te rm in ed th at it sh owe d th at Mab ry ’s m ed ic at io ns , whe n pr op erl y an d co ns is te nt ly

us ed

, were “ rel at iv el y effe ct iv e in co nt ro ll in g [Ma br y ’s] sym pt om s to th e po in t he

co ul d do at le as t un sk il le d wo r k a c t i vi ty.” Mab ry ha s no t be en ho sp it al iz ed fo r a

ps y ch ot ic ep is od e si nc e 2 00 4 o r fo r su ic id al th ou gh ts si nc e 2 00 7, an d h is tre at m en t

-8

-no te s si nc e 20 10 in di cat e he ha s m ad e pr og res s i n th erap y wit h m ed ic at io n. The

no te s al so in di cat e Mab ry rep or te d hi s an xi et y was m uc h m or e m an ag eab le wit h

med ic at io n an d he was pl eas ed wit h hi s pr og res s. Dr. Hes te r’s rep or t no t e d t h a t
med i c a ti on co nt ro ll ed Mab ry ’s ps y ch os is

. And Mab ry hi m se lf te st ifi ed at th e ad m in is tra ti ve he ari ng th at hi s m ed ic at io ns wor ke d w e l l

. The reco rd in th is cas e si m pl y do es no t su pp or t a fin di ng th at Mab ry ’s m en ta l il ln es s is pa rti cu la rly di ffi cu lt

to m an ag e o r su sc ep ti bl e to wid e swi ng s i n t he type o r se ve rit y of s y m pt om s.

The ALJ al so vi ewed Mab ry ’s hi st or y of ho ld in g lo w-ear ni ng job s fo r va ry in g le ng th s of tim e as an in di cat io n th at he la ck ed m ot iv at io n to ret ur n t o wo rk

. Mab ry

co nt en ds in st ead th at “ an y la ck of m ot iv at io n is a m an ife st a t i o n o f hi s [m en ta l]

im pa irment.” A po or hi st or y of em pl oym en t m ay be ev id en ce of a cl ai m an t’s la ck of

m ot iv at io n to wor k. Pear sa ll

, 27 4 F.3 d at 12 18

. Bu t we reco gn iz e th at a sp ot ty wor k

reco rd m ay al so refl ect an in ab il it y to wor k on a co ns is te nt ba si s, whi ch m ay su pp or t

a fin di ng of di sa bi li ty. S e e G am be r v. Bo wen , 82 3 F.2 d 24 2, 24 5 (8 th Ci r. 19 87 ) (ci ti ng Mi ll er v . Heck le r, 74 7 F.2 d 47 5, 47 8 (8 Ci r. 19 84 )). Mab ry la st wor ke d i n th

Mar ch 20 11

, an d, acco rd in g to hi s m ed ic al reco rd s, was lo ok in g fo r a job in Feb ru ary
20 12

, whi ch is aft er hi s al le ge d on se t da te

. Thi s ev id en ce is in acco rd wit h Dr.

Hes te r’s op in io n th at Mab ry ha d th e ab il it y to “ co m pl et e ta sk s if he can m ot iv at e to

at te nd wor k.” In ad di t i o n , th e m ed ic al reco rd s sh owe d pr og res s in 20 11 an d 20 12

, fu rth er sup po rti ng th e ALJ’s co nc lu si on th at Mab ry ’s wor k hi st or y was m or e li ke ly

du e to a la ck of m ot iv at io n th an a la ck of ab il it y

. See Gowel l v. Apf el

, 24 2 F.3 d 79 3,

79 8 (8 th Ci r. 20 01 ) (n o sh owi ng of de te rio rat io n in sym

pt om s su pp or te d th e ALJ’s

de te rm in at io n t ha t cl ai m an t was no t d is ab le d)

.

W e co nc lu de th at su bs ta nt ia l ev id en ce in th e reco rd su pp or te d th e ALJ’s RFC

de te rm in at io n an d th at th e ALJ’s RFC de te rm in at io n in cl ud ed th e ne ces sa ry li m it at io ns to acco un t fo r Mab ry ’s m en ta l im pa irments

. Acco rd in gl y , we affi rm th e de ci si on of t he di st ric t co ur t.

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

-9

-