FIL ED U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S EL EVENTHCI RCUI T J ANUARY 7, 2011 J OHN L EY CL ERK [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE U

NITED STATE S COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELE VENTH CIRCUIT

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ No. 1 0- 12 33 4 Non -Arg um en t Ca le nd ar

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ D.C. Dock etNo. 8 :0 8- cv -0 26 02 -EAJ SOFIA G. MANZO, ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pl ai nt iff -Ap pe ll an t, ve rs us COMM ISSI ONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l 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

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ (J anua ry 7, 2 01 1) Befo re BLACK, MAR TIN andFAY, Circ ui t J ud ge s. PER CURI AM: So fiaMan zo ap pe al s fr om th e m ag is tra te jud ge ’s ord er af firm in g t heCo m

m is si on er’s d en ia l o f he r ap pl ic at io n fo r supp le m en ta l s ecurit y in co m e (“ SSI” ), 42 U.S.C. §§ 40 5( g) , 13 83 (c)( 3) . Man zo arg ue s tha t the Adm in is tra ti ve 1 Law Ju dg e (“ ALJ”) erre d b y (1) cla ss ifyin g h er v is ua l i m pa irment a s “ gl au co m a with ahi st ory

of b il at eral cat arac t s ur ge rie s” ; (2 ) reject in g h er t es ti m on y th atsh e ha d h ead ach es an d v is io n p ro bl em s; an d (3 ) fi nd in g t ha t h er an xi ety was n ota se ve re m en ta l i m

pa irment. Aft er a tho ro ug h re vi ew of th e rec or d andth e p art ie s’ br ie fs , we affi rm . I. Man zo fir starg ue s tha t the ALJ in co rrec tl y id en ti fie d h er v is ua l i m

pa irment as “ gl au co m a wit h ahi st ory of b il at eral cat arac t s ur ge rie s.” We rev ie w th e ALJ’s ru li ng , no t the di st ric t co urt’s jud gm en t. Sh in n e x re l. Sh in n v . Comm ’r of So c. Sec., 3 91 F.3d12 76 , 12 82 (11 thCir . 20 04 ). “ Whe n, as inth is cas e, th e ALJ de ni es be ne fit s an d t he [App eal s C ou nc il ] de ni es rev ie w, we rev ie w th e ALJ’s de ci si on as t he Co m

m is si on er’s fi na l d eci si on .” Dou gh ty v. Apfe l, 2 45 F.3d12 74 , 12 78 (11 th Cir . 20 01 ). W e d o n otrewei gh ev id en ce, d eci de fact s an ew, orm ak e cred ib il ity

fin di ng s. Mo or e v . Barn ha rt, 4 05 F.3d12 08 , 12 11 (11 thCir . 20 05 ). In st ead , we rev ie w th e en ti re re co rdto de te rm in e whe th er the de ci si on was The pa rties conse nted to the exercise of jurisdiction by

a United States Mag istrate Judge 1 in acc ordanc e with 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) a nd Fe dera l Rule of Civil Procedur e 73. 2supp orte d b y subs ta nt ia l ev id en ce. Id . Sub st an ti al ev id en ce i s m or e th ana sc in ti ll a, Lewis v. Ca ll ah an , 12 5 F .3d14 36 , 14 40 (11 th Cir . 19 97 ), bu t l es s tha n a pr ep on de ran ce, an d i s “ su chrel ev an t ev id en ce as a reas on ab le pe rs on wou ld acce ptas a de qu at e to supp ort a c on cl us io n.” Mo or e, 40 5 F .3dat 1 21 1. Bu t the ALJ’s co nc lu si on s o f law are s ub ject t o “ ex act in g e xa m in at io n.” Mart inv. Su ll iv an , 89 4 F .2d15 20 , 15 29 (11 th Cir . 19 90 ). The So ci al Secu rit y

reg ul at io ns setforth th e fo ll owi ng fiv e-s te p “ se qu en ti al ev al ua ti on ” p ro ces s t o d et erm in e whe th er a cl ai m an t i s d is ab le d: (1) th e d is ab il ity ex am in er d et erm in es whethe r th e cl ai m an t i s en ga ge d i n “ subs ta nt ia l g ai nf ul act iv ity ”; (2) if n ot , th e ex am in er d eci de s wh ethe r th e cl ai m an t’s co nd it io n o r im pa irment i s “ se ve re,” i.e. , whethe r itsi gn ifi can tl y li m it s the cla im an t’s p hysic al orm en ta l ab il ity

to do ba si c work a ct iv it ie s; (3) if s o, the ex am in er d eci de s whe th er the cla im an t’s i m pa irment m eet s o r equa ls th e se ve rit y of t he sp eci fie d im pa irments inth e Lis ti ng of I m pa irments (“ Lis ti ng ”), the reb y pre cl ud in g a ny ga in fu l wo rkact iv ity ; (4 ) if th e cl ai m an t h as a se ve re i m pa irment t ha t d oe s n ot m eetor e qu al th e se ve rit y of a n i m pa irment i n the Lis ti ng , th e ex am in er as se ss es a cl ai m an t’s re si du al fun ct io na l capa ci ty (“ RFC” ), whi chm eas ur es whet he r a cl ai m an t ca n p erfo rm

pa strel ev an t wo rkde sp it e th e im pa irment; an d (5 ) if

th e cl ai m an t i s u nabl e to do pa strel ev an t wo rk , th e ex am in er d et erm in es whet he r, in 3li gh t o f th e cl ai m an t’s RF C, ag e, educ at io n, an d wo rkexpe rie nc e, th e cl ai m an t ca n

pe rfo rm ot he r work. Se e Crayto n v . Cal la ha n, 1 20 F.3d12 17 , 12 19 (11 th Cir . 19 97 ); 2 0 C .F.R. §§ 40 4.1 52 0( c)-( f), 4 16 .92 0( c)-( f). The ALJ in th is cas e d et erm in ed(1) th atMan zo ha d n oten ga ge d i n subs ta nt ia l g ai nf

ul act iv ity

si nc e sh e fi le d h er ap pl ic at io n fo r SSI o n M ay 18 , 20 05 ; (2 ) th atsh e h adhypo th yro id is m , hypert en si on , hyperl ip id em ia , and

“ gl au co m a wit h ahi st ory of b il at eral cat arac t s ur ge rie s,” wh ic h wer e al l s ev ere im pa irments , as wel l as an xi ety , whi chwas ano n- se ve re i m pa irment; (3) th atno ne of th e im pa irments m etor e qu al eda li st edim pa irment; an d (4 ) th atsh e h adth e RFC t o p erfo rm

he r pa strel ev an t wo rkas asewi ng m ach in e o pe rat or . Man zo arg ue s tha t the ALJ erre d a t s te p t wo b y in co rrec tl y

id en ti fy in g h er se ve re i m pa irment a s “ gl au co m a wit h ahi st ory of b il at eral cat arac t s ur ge rie s” rathe r th an“ cat arac ts , th e cat arac t s ur ge rie s the m se lv es , andth e p eri odof r eco ve ry fro m th os e su rg eri es ,” an d t he refo re i m pr op erl y fai le d t o c on si de r he r vi su al im pa irments res ul ti ng fro m

th e cat arac ts an d c at arac t s ur ge rie s wh ende te rm in in g he r RFC at s te p fo ur . Man zo co nt en ds th athe r im pa irment wa s n ota “ hi st ory ” o f bi la te ral cat arac t s ur ge rie s dur in g t he rel ev an t t im e p eri od , whi chwas Jun e 2 00 5

4th ro ug h S ep te m be r 20 06 , be cau se he r cat arac t i m pa irment d idno t i m

pr ov e unt il 2 Mar ch22 , 20 07 . W e rejectth is arg um en t. The ALJ p ro pe rly con si de redMan zo ’s vi su al im pa irments durin g t he rel ev an t t im e p eri odan d fo un d t ha t h er “ vi si on rem ai ns m or e o r le ss in ta ct(20 /4 0) .” As the di stric t co urt ex pl ai ne d, thi s “ ob se rv at io n . . . acco un ts forth e p eri od s b efo re an d a fte r [Ma nz o’s] cat arac t s ur ge rie s.” Th e reco rdrev eal s tha t fr om

Feb ru ary 20 05 un ti l h er ca ta ractsu rg eri es inMarc h a nd Apr il of 2 00 6, M an zo ’s vi si on was b etween20 /4 0 a nd20 /5 0 i n b ot h e y es . In h er po st -o pe rat iv e v is it s i n M ay 20 06 , Man zo ’s vi si on ha d i m pr ov edto 20 /2 0 i n b ot h ey es . W e th eref

or e co nc lu de th atsubs ta nt ia l ev id en ce s up po rte d t he ALJ’s as se ss m en t o f Man zo ’s vi si on du rin g t he rel ev an t t im e p eri odan d tha t the ALJ d id no t err by clas si fy in g M an zo ’s im pa irment a s “ a h is to ry

of b il at eral cat arac t su rg eri es .” Man zo als o app ears to arg ue th atth e ALJ erredat s te p fo urof the seque nt ia l ev al ua ti onby notin cl ud in g M an zo ’s cla im edvi su al li m it at io ns inth e h y po th et ic al qu es ti on po se d t o t he vo cat io na l ex pe rt ( “ VE”) to de te rm in e Manz o’s RF C. “ In SSIbenef

its cannot be pa id until the month afte r an a pplication is filed and all other 2 require ments for e ligibility are met. 20 C.F.R. § 416.335. Manzo filed her a pplication for SSI in May 2005, so the rele vant time period be g ins in J une 2005. Onc e a c laimant rea ches a g e 65, she ca n qualify for SSI based on a g e rather than disability . 20 C.F.R. § 416.202. Be cause Manzo’s application wa s still pendingwhen she turned 65 in September 2006, the ALJ conclude d that she would be e ligible to re ceive pay ments beg inning in Oc tober 2006. 5or de r fo r a [VE’s] te st im on y to co ns ti tu te subs ta nt ia l ev id en ce, the ALJ m us t p os e a h y po th et ic al qu es ti on whi chco m pr is es all of t he cla im an t’s i m pa irments .” W il so n v . Barn ha rt, 2 84 F.3d12 19 , 12 27 (11 th Cir . 20 02 ). The ALJm us t i ns tru ct th e VE to co ns id er al l “ se ve re” i m pa irments wheneli ci ti ng tes ti m on y . Pen dl ey v. Heck le r, 76 7 F .2d15 61 , 15 63 (11 thCir . 19 85 ). Bu t “ th e ALJ [i ]s no t re qu ire d t o in cl ud e fi nd in gs inth e h y po th et ic al th atth e ALJ h adpro pe rly rejecte d a s un supp orte d.” Crawfo rdv. Co m m ’r of So c. Sec., 3 63 F.3d11 55 , 11 61 (11 th Cir . 20 04 ). The ALJdi d n otne edto in cl ud e Manz o’s cl ai m edvi su al li m it at io ns inth e hypo th et ic al qu es ti on be cau se , as e xp la in edab ov e, subs ta nt ia l ev id en ce s up po rte d th e ALJ’s rejec ti on of t he se cla im edli m it at io ns du rin g the rel ev an t t im e p eri od . II. Man zo ne xtarg ue s tha t s ub st an ti al ev id en ce d oe s n otsupp ort the ALJ’s de ci si on no t t o c red itMan zo ’s tes ti m on y th atsh e su ffer edfro m

he ad ach es an d vi si on pro bl em s as a res ul t o f he r gl au co m a. To es tabl is h d is ab il ity th ro ug h h er own tes ti m on y

co nc ern in g p ai n o r ot he r subjec ti ve sym pt om s, M an zo ne ed edto sh ow “ (1 ) ev id en ce o f anun de rlyin g m ed ic al co nd it io n; an d (2 ) ei th er (a ) ob jecti ve m ed ic al ev id en ce co nf irming th e se ve rity

of t he all eg edpa in ; o r (b ) th at th e o bjec ti ve ly det erm in edm ed ic al co nd it io n c anreas on ab ly be expe ct edto gi ve ris e to th e cl ai m edpa in .” W il so n, 2 84 F.3dat 1 22 5. Th e ALJ m us t arti cu late 6ex pl ic itan d a de qu at e rea so ns fordi sc red it in g t es ti m on y co nc ern in g s ub

jecti ve co m pl ai nt s, Dy er v . Barn ha rt, 3 95 F.3d12 06 , 12 10 (11 th Cir . 20 05 ), an d c an no t di sc red ittes ti m on y

as t o t he in te ns ity

or p ers is te nc e o f pa in an d fa ti gu e so le ly ba se d o n t he lac k o f ob

jecti ve m ed ic al ev id en ce. See 20 C.F.R. § § 4 04 .15 29 (c)( 2) , 41 6.9 29 (c)( 2) ; s ee al so Tod d v . Heck le r, 73 6 F .2d64 1, 6 42 (11 thCir . 19 84 ) (ex pl ai ni ng th atpa in alo ne m ay be di sabl in g a ndth atitis im pr op er fo r anALJ to requi re o bjec ti ve m ed ic al ev id en ce t o s up po rt acla im of d is ab li ng pa in ). The ALJ p ro pe rly sta te d t he sp eci fic reas on s fo r di sc red it in g M an zo ’s te st im on y th atsh e su ffer edfro m

he ad ach es an d v is io n p ro bl em s. Th e ALJ fo un d,

“ba se d o n aco ns id erat io n o f th e en ti re ca se reco rd ,” th atMan zo ’s tes ti m on y co nc ern in g t he sev eri ty, in te ns ity an d l im it in g e ffec ts of t he sym pt om s o f he r im pa irment we re n otcred ib le be cau se th ey co nf li ct edwith M an zo ’s RFC, wh ic h as si gn edno vi su al li mit at io ns . The ALJ e xp la in edth atMan zo ha d n otreg ul arl y rep orte d c hr on ic he ad ach es to he r tr eat in g d oc to r. W hi le Man zo di d re po rt bl urrin es s, fl oa te rs an d d iff ic ul ty readi ng du rin g h er ca ta ractev al ua ti on pri orto he r su rg eri es , th e ALJ co nc lu de d fr om th e rec or d t ha t M an zo ’s “ vi si on rem ai ns m or e o r le ss in ta ct(20 /4 0) ” an d e m ph as iz edth at“ no tre at in g o r ex am in in g s ou rce ha [d ] of fere d l im it at io ns gre at er tha n t ho se fou nd[in Man zo ’s RFC].” W e co nc lu de th atsubs ta nt ia l ev id en ce s up po rte d t he ALJ’s fi nd in g t ha t the tes ti m on y 7th atMan zo su ffer edfro m he ad ach es an d v is io n p ro bl em s was no t cr ed ib le to th e ex te ntth atitwas i nc on si st en t wi th th e co nt rary evi de nc e und erl y in g t he RFC as se ss m en t. III. Man zo als o a rg ue s tha t s ub st an ti al ev id en ce d oe s n otsupp ort the ALJ’s fin di ng th atMan zo ’s anx ie ty w as no t s ev ere. With reg ardto st ep two of t he se qu en ti al pro ces s, anim pa irment i s “ se ve re” i f it“ si gn ifi can tl y li m it s cl ai m an t’s ph y si cal or m en ta l ab il ity to do ba si c work a ct iv it ie s.” C rayton , 12 0 F .3dat 1 21 9. An i m pa irment i s n otsev ere i f itis a “ sl ig htab no rm al ity ” th atha s “ a m in im al effe cton th e in di vi du al th at. . . wou ldno t b e ex pe ct edto in te rfer e wit h the in di vi du al ’s abi li ty to wo rk , irre sp ect iv e o f ag e, educ at io n, o r work e xp eri en ce.” Brad y v. Heck le r, 72 4 F .2d91 4, 9 20 (11 thCir . 19 84 ). Altho ug h t he cla im an t be ars th e b ur de n o f sh owi ng sev eri ty, th e b ur de n i s m il d, s uc h tha t a c la im an t n eed on ly sho w her

im pa irment i s “ no t s o s li gh t an d i ts effe ctis no t s o m in im al ” as to be tri vi al . McDan ie l v . Bowe n, 8 00 F.2d10 26 , 10 31 (11 th Cir . 19 86 ). Sev eri ty is m eas ur edba se d o n i ts effe ctup on ab il ity to work , “ no t s im

pl y interm s o f de vi at io n fr om

pu rel y m ed ic al st an da rd s o f bo di ly perfe ct io n o r no rm al ity .” McC ru te r v. B owe n, 7 91 F.2d15 44 , 15 47 (11 th Cir . 19 86 ). W e co nc lu de th atsubs ta nt ia l ev id en ce s up po rts th e ALJ’s fi nd in g tha t 8Man zo fai le d t o c arry her b ur de n o f es tabl is hi ng th athe r an xi ety co ns ti tu te d a se ve re m en ta l i m

pa irment, i ns te adof a“ sl ig htab no rm al ity .” The ALJno te d i n pa rti cu la r th atMan zo ha d n ev er b eenreferredform en ta l h eal th tre atm en t. See Ant ho ny v. Su ll iv an , 95 4 F .2d28 9, 2 95 (5t h C ir. 1 99 2) (ho ld in g t ha t ALJ ’s fin di ng th atcla im an t’s m en ta l i m pa irment wa s n otsev ere was supp orte d b y subs ta nt ia l ev id en ce wh ere t he reco rd“ d[ id ] no t . . . di sc lo se th attre atm en t h as be enreco m

m en de d fo r he r co nd it io n” ). Man zo arg ue s the ALJ fai le d t o c on si de r th e p os si bi li ty tha t h er fa m il y ph y si ci ande ci de d n otto refe r he r fo r m en ta l h eal th tre atm en t b ecau se th e p hysic ian kne w th atMan zo ’s in su ran ce wo ul d n otco ve r th e tre atm en t. Bu t thi s i s p ur e sp ecu la ti on , as M an zo ha s p oi nt edto no ev id en ce i n t he reco rdto su gg es t tha t the lac k o f a ref erra l was du e to he r in ab il ity to pa y . W e th eref or e co nc lu de th atsubs ta nt ia l ev id en ce s up po rts th e ALJ’s fi nd in g tha t Man zo fai le d t o e st ab li sh th athe r an xi ety was asev ere m en ta l i m

pa irment. Fo r al l o f th es e rea so ns , we affi rm th e Co m m is si on er’s d eci si on . AFFIRMED.

9