FIL ED U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S EL EVENTHCI RCUI T MARCH 16, 2012 J OHN L EY CL ERK [DO N OT PUBLISH]

IN THE UN ITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELE VENTH CIRCUIT

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ No. 1 1- 14 47 2 Non -Arg um en t Ca le nd ar

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ D.C. Dock etNo. 1 :1 0- cv -0 07 81 -GGB ERNEST LORD, ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll Pl ai nt iff -Ap pe ll an t, ve rs us COMM ISSI ONER, SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINIS TRATION, ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll Defen dant -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 North ernDis tri ctof Ge or gi a

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ (Ma rch 16 , 20 12 ) Befo re HULL, PRYOR an d B LACK, Circ ui t J ud ge s. PER CURI AM:Erne stLordap pe al s the ord er tha t af firm edth e d en ia l o f hi s ap pl ic at io n 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 fro m

th e So ci al Secu rit y Adm in is tra ti on . 42 U.S.C. §§ 40 5( g) , 13 83 (c)( 3) . Lordch al le ng es th e fin di ng s o f th e ad m in is tra ti ve law ju dg e th attwo of Lo rd ’s abs en ces du rin g a pe rio d o f ev al ua ti on at Go od wil l o f North Geor gi a, In c., were co m pa ti bl e wit h em pl oym en t an d t ha t Lo rdha d s uf fic ie ntres idua l fu nc ti on al cap aci ty to wo rkas a st or e at te nd an t. We affirm . W e rev ie w th e d eci si on of t he Co m m is si on er “ to de te rm in e if itis supp orte d by sub st an ti al ev id en ce an d b as edon pro pe r le ga l s ta nd ard s.” C rawfo rdv. Co m m ’r of So c. Sec., 3 63 F.3d11 55 , 11 58 (11 th Cir . 20 04 ). “ ‘Sub st an ti al 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 ptas a de qu at e to supp ort a c on cl us io n.’” Id. (quo ti ng Lewis v. Cal la ha n, 1 25 F.3d14 36 , 14 39 (11 th Cir . 19 97 )). Tha t re vi ew “pr ecl ud es de ci di ng th e fac ts an ew, m ak in g c red ib il it y de te rm in at io ns , or re -wei gh in g t he ev id en ce.” Mo or e v . Barn ha rt, 4 05 F.3d12 08 , 12 11 (11 th Cir . 20 05 ). Subs ta nt ia l ev id en ce s up po rts th e fi nd in g o f th e adm in is tra ti ve law ju dg e th atLord ’s two ab se nc es du rin g ape rio d o f ev al ua ti on at Go od wil l wer e at tri bu tabl e to th e st res s o f th atjob , no t an in ab il it y to att en d wo rk . Lordbl am ed th e ab se nc es on anil ln es s an d h is tre m or s, b utne it he r co nd it io n h adaffe ct edhi s 2at te nd an ce atot he r job s. Whenev al ua te d b y Goo dwi ll , Lordha d b een un de rg oi ng tra in in g a ndbe cam e fru st rat edan d o ve rwh el m edbe cau se a job co ach ha d cri ti ci zedhi s re pe ti ti ve cle an in g h ab it s. Lo rdtes ti fie d t ha t s tre ss an d anx ie ty cau se d h is tre m or s, an d b oth Dr. Lav an y a Subr am an ia n a ndDr. Mag dy Rezk rep orte d t ha t an xi ety

ex acerba te d Lo rd ’s tre m or s. No tabl y , Lord ’s ph y si ci an s rep orte d t ha t Lo rd ’s tre m or s wer e co nt ro ll edbe fo re h e b eg anan d a fte r he en de d hi s trai ni ng at Go od wil l. Subs ta nt ia l ev id en ce al so supp orts th e fi nd in g o f th e ad m in is tra ti ve law jud ge th atLordco ul d wo rkas ast or e at te nd an t. Des pi te Lord ’s li fel on g s tru gg le with o bs es si ve co m

pu ls iv e d is or de r, be twee n 1 99 4 and20 01 , he wo rk edtwi ce at Ry an ’s Ste ak

Hou se , firs t as a gr eet er an d s erv er an d l at er as a di sh was he r an d b ar ru nn er, an d t wice at Walm art , firs t as a cu st od ia n a ndlat er as a sa le s as so ci at e, st oc ke r, an d c artpu sh er. He al so work edforan ot he r em pl oyer as acar was h de ta il er an d m ai nt en an ce wo rk er. Afte r Lor d was di ag no se d i n 2 00 2 wi th tre m or s an d a sthm a, he work edas ado na ti on att en da ntat Go odwil l an d p art ic ip at ed se ve ral ti m es init s trai ni ng pro gr am . Drs. Vir gi ni a Wood , a co ns ul ti ng ps y ch ol og is t, an d J effr ey Vid ic , who co nduc te d aps y ch ia tri c rev ie w of Lo rd ’s m ed ic al reco rd s, re po rte d t ha t Lo rd ’s ob se ss iv e d is or de r im po se d m od erat e li mit at io ns inso ci al fun ct io ni ng , con cen tra ti on , per si st en ce, an d p ace, a ndth at 3Lordco ul d re cal l an d c om pl et e si m pl e ta sk s. Th e admin is tra ti ve law ju dg e in cl ud edth e fi nd in gs of Woo d a ndVid ic inth e h y po th et ic al qu es ti on s p os edto th e v oc at io na l ex pe rt, wh o o pi ne d t ha t Lo rdwas c ap ab le of wo rk in g a s a s to re at te nd an t. Lor d a rg ue s tha t o pi ni on fai le d t o a cco un t fo r hi s p oo r co m m un ic at io n sk il ls , bu t the hypo th et ic al qu es ti on pro vi de d t ha t Lo rdrequi reda worki ng en vi ro nm en t i nv ol vi ng m in im al st res s an d s up erv is io n. Mo reo ve r, Lordha d rep orte d t ha t h e en

joy edjob s i nv ol vi ng cu st om er s erv ic e an d the adm in is tra ti ve la w jud ge ob se rv edth atLord ’s abi li ty to co m m un ic at e im

pr ov edas h e b ecame m or e co m fo rtabl e o n t he witne ss st an d. Se e Ma ci a v . Bowe n, 8 29 F.2d10 09 , 10 11 (11 th Cir . 19 87 ). Lordals o c ha ll en ge s the de ci si on to di sc ou ntth e co nc lu si on inth e Goo dwi ll ev al ua ti on th athe is in cap ab le of c om pe ti ti ve em pl oym en t, b utanadm in is tra ti ve law ju dg e is no t re qu ire d t o c red itth e o pi ni on of a Goo dwi ll rep res en ta ti ve th atLordis di sabl ed . See 2 0 C .F.R. § 4 16 .92 7( e)– (f). W e AFFIRMth e d en ia l o f Lor d’s ap pl ic at io n fo r be ne fit s.

4