IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON 

ANGELA LYNN OLSEN, Case No. 3:14-cv-01117-AA 

OPINION AND ORDER 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

CAROLYN W. COLVIN, 

Acting Commissioner of Social 

Security, 

Defendant. 

AIKEN, Chief Judge: 

This action is brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) to 

obtain judicial review of the final decision of the Commissioner 

denying Plaintiff's applications for Disability Insurance 

Benefits (DIE) and Supplemental Security Income (SSI). Upon 

review, the Commissioner's decision is AFFIRMED. 

Background 

On September 17, 2010, Plaintiff protectively filed 

1 - OPINION AND ORDER 

Case 3:14-cv-01117-AA Document 24 Filed 07/22/15 Page 1 of 10
applications for DIB and SSI. Both filings alleged an onset 

disability date of July 1, 2 00 6. The applications were denied 

initially and on reconsideration. After requesting a hearing, 

Plaintiff ~nd a vocational expert (VE) testified before an 

Administrative Law Judge (ALJ). Shortly thereafter, the ALJ 

issued a written decision finding that Plaintiff was not 

disabled as· of the alleged onset date. Plaintiff sought revie'"' 

from the Appeals Council, which denied the request for review. 

Plaintiff then sought judicial review. 

Standard of Review 

The court must affirm the Commissioner's decision if it is 

based on proper legal standards and the findings are supported 

by substantial evidence in the record. Hammock v. Bowen, 8 7 9 

F.2d 498, 501 (9th Cir. 1989). Substantial evidence is "more 

than a mere scintilla. It means such relevant evidence as a 

reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a 

conclusion." Richardson v. Perales, 402 U.S. 389, 401 (1971) 

(citation and internal quotations omitted). The court must weigh 

"both the evidence that supports and detracts from the 

[Commissioner's] conclusions." Martinez v. Heckler, 807 F.2d 

771, 772 (9th Cir. 1986). Variable interpretations of the 

evidence are insignificant if the Commissioner's interpretation 

is rational. Burch v. Barnhart, 400 F.3d 676, 679 (9th Cir. 

2005) 

2 - OPINION AND ORDER 

Case 3:14-cv-01117-AA Document 24 Filed 07/22/15 Page 2 of 10
The initial burden of proof rests upon the claimant to 

establish disability. Howard v. Heckler, 782 F.2d 1484, 1486 

(9th Cir. 198 6) . To meet this burden, the claimant must 

demonstrate an "inability to engage in any substantial gainful 

activity by reason of any medically determinable physical or 

mental impairment which can be expected... to last for a 

continuous period of not less than 12 months." 42 U.S.C. § 

423(d) (1) (A). 

Discussion 

Plaintiff a~gues the ALJ erred by: 1) improperly 

discounting Plaintiff's testimony; 2) improperly discounting lay 

witness statements; and 3) failing to incorporate the above 

evidence into the residual functional capacity (RFC) The 

Commissioner argues that the ALJ's decision is supported by 

legally sufficient reasons and that this Court should affirm the 

Commissioner's decision. 

I. The ALJ' s Evaluation of Plaintiff's Credibility 

Plaintiff first contends that the ALJ improperly evaluated 

her testimony. Once a claimant produces medical evidence of an 

impairment, the Commissioner may discredit the claimant's 

testimony as to the severity of symptoms only with clear and 

convincing reasons. Reddick v. Chater, 157 F.3d 715, 722 (9th 

Cir. 1998). In making these determinations, the ALJ is allowed 

to use ordinary techniques used in the evaluation of 

3 - OPINION AND ORDER 

Case 3:14-cv-01117-AA Document 24 Filed 07/22/15 Page 3 of 10
credibility. Molina v. Astrue, 674 F.3d 1104, 1112 (9th Cir. 

2012). For example, "[i]f a claimant is able to spend a 

substantial part of [her] day engaged in pursuits involving the 

performance of physical functions that are transferable to a 

work setting, a specific finding as to this fact may be 

sufficient to discredit a claimant's allegations." Morgan v. 

Comm' r. of the Soc. Sec. Admin., 169 F. 3d 595, 600 (9th Cir. 

1999). The ALJ may also consider inconsistent or unexplained 

claimant testimony, failure to follow a course of treatment or 

recommendations of doctors, evidence of self-limiting behaviors, 

and a claimant's work history. See Thomas v. Barnhart, 278 F.3d 

947, 959 (9th Cir. 2002); see Molina, 674 F. 3d at 1112. 

Plaintiff alleges that she has severe limitations such as 

limited mobility in her shoulder, a lack of ability to walk or 

sit for extended periods of time, diabetes, PTSD that does not 

allow her to interact with people without becoming irritated, 

extreme migraines, and back and abdomen spasms. Tr. 106, 108, 

110, 112-13, 116-18, 120-22. Due to these impairments, Plaintiff 

claims she is disabled. The ALJ provided three reasons for his 

adverse credibility finding. They are: 1) inconsistencies 

between her alleged functional limitations and her daily 

activities; 2) Plaintiff's lack of candor and truthfulness with 

her doctor; and 3) the conservative treatment provided to treat 

4 - OPINION AND ORDER 

Case 3:14-cv-01117-AA Document 24 Filed 07/22/15 Page 4 of 10
her medical issues. Tr. 33-34. I find that the ALJ provided 

legally sufficient reasons for his credibility evaluation. 

The record supports the ALJ' s finding that Plaintiff made 

several statements that are inconsistent with her daily 

activities. For example, the ALJ noted that Plaintiff was able 

to perform household chores such as laundry, washing the dishes, 

and vacuuming. Tr. 33, 98-101. Additionally, the ALJ cited 

activities in which the Plaintiff interacts with people, such as 

shopping, talking on the phone and visiting friends and family. 

Tr. 33, 98-99, 105. The ALJ noted that Plaintiff spends time 

with her long-term boyfriend and neighbor everyday and that they 

go out to dinner occasionally. Tr. 99, 104. Finally, the ALJ 

noted that Plaintiff was able to care for her young daughter by 

driving her to school, dressing her, and taking care of her at 

night for much of the time. Tr. 33, 100, 102, 401. 

These activities are inconsistent with the severity of the 

limitations Plaintiff alleges. For example, Plaintiff alleges 

that she has severe deliberating migraines four to five times a 

week that last for days at a time, during which she lays in the 

fetal position and covers her ears and eyes with towels and 

pillows. Tr. 110-111, 114. This is inconsistent with her daily 

activities of basic cooking, cleaning, and child rearing. 

Plaintiff also alleges, for example, that her PTSD causes her to 

be closed off, angry, depressed, and unable to interact with 

5 - OPINION AND ORDER 

Case 3:14-cv-01117-AA Document 24 Filed 07/22/15 Page 5 of 10
people such as supervisors or co-v.,rorkers. Tr. 74-75, 91, 116, 

121. However, the severity of this impairment is inconsistent 

with going to the store, interacting with family and friends, 

seeing her boyfriend and neighbor daily, and going to dinner in 

public places. 

Second, the record supports the ALJ's finding that 

Plaintiff was dishonest in her reports to Dr. Taycher, her 

treating doctor, regarding marijuana use when she had agreed to 

a narcotic contract. Tr. 34, 770. In determining the credibility 

of a witness or claimant testimony, the ALJ may evaluate 

testimony using ordinary techniques of credibility evaluation, 

including truthfulness. Burch v. Barnhart, 400 F.3d 676, 680 

(9th Cir. 2 005) . To rebut the ALJ' s finding, Plaintiff argues 

that Dr. Taycher specifically noted that Plaintiff had always 

been responsible with her narcotic medication in the past, tr. 

770; Dr. Taycher did not doubt Plaintiff's disability or 

credibility; Dr. Taycher understood why Plaintiff would seek 

alternative medication; and Dr. Taycher continued prescribing 

the medication. Pl. Reply Br. 4. 

The record indicates that Dr. Taycher "strongly advised" 

Plaintiff that her continued use of marijuana would force her to 

stop prescribing narcotics to Plaintiff. See Tr. 770. Granted, 

the medical records do not reflect Dr. Taycher' s opinion about 

Plaintiff's credibility, or her acquiescence with Plaintiff's 

6 - OPINION AND ORDER 

Case 3:14-cv-01117-AA Document 24 Filed 07/22/15 Page 6 of 10
marijuana use. See id. Rather, the record reflects that while 

under a medication agreement disallowing marijuana use, 

Plaintiff did not disclose marijuana use to her doctor. See id. 

While this evidence may be subject to varying interpretations, 

this Court cannot find the ALJ's finding to be unreasonable. 

Finally, the record supports the ALJ' s finding that 

Plaintiff received minimal and conservative treatment. Tr. 33. 

Evidence of conservative treatment iS sufficient grounds f6r an 

ALJ to discount a claimant's testimony. Parra v. As true, 4 81 

F. 3d 7 42, 7 51 (9th Cir. 2007) . The ALJ noted that since her 

initial complaint of back pain in August 2010, Plaintiff has 

continued on a regimen of narcotic treatment, including flexeril 

and Vicodin, and icing her back. Tr. 33. The ALJ noted 

additional instances of medication for treatment of nausea and 

vomiting. Tr. 33. Further, the ALJ noted that while Plaintiff 

used an inhaler for her asthma, her increased coughing and 

wheezing was treated by more prescriptions. Tr. 33-34. Finally, 

despite the pain in her back and abdomen continuing, the ALJ 

noted only one time in which Plaintiff received treatment other 

than prescriptions. That instance was a cystectomy in May, 2012, 

to treat endometriosis. Tr. 34. 1 Thus, because the ALJ provided 

Plaintiff argues that the ALJ improperly considered her 

inability 

question 

seek or 

to pay out of pocket. However, the ALJ did not 

Plaintiff's credibility on grounds that she did not 

undergo aggressive treatments. Rather, The ALJ simply 

7 - OPINION AND ORDER 

Case 3:14-cv-01117-AA Document 24 Filed 07/22/15 Page 7 of 10
clear and convincing reasons supported by the record, this Court 

upholds the ALJ's evaluation of Plaintiff's credibility. 

II. The ALJ's Evaluation of Witness Statements 

Plaintiff also argues the ALJ failed to provide germane 

reasons to discredit the statements of lay several law 

witnesses. The ALJ stated that the witness statements "are 

considered credible to the extent reports of what has been seen 

and heard are accurate." Tr. 34-35. The ALJ also added, however, 

that the claimant's daily activities, treating medical evidence, 

and conservative medical treatment do not show she is as limited 

as the witnesses alleged. Tr. 34-35. I agree. 

For example, Plaintiff's mother wrote that she cares for 

Plaintiff's child two to four days a week and drops her back off 

at night so she can go to school in the morning. Tr. 44 7. She 

also wrote that Plaintiff has trouble "standing, bending, or 

stooping." Tr. 4 4 7. Finally, she wrote that Plaintiff does not 

want to interact with others. Tr. 4 4 7. Similarly, Plaintiff's 

boyfriend wrote that Plaintiff began having pain in her hip and 

back that became progressively worse. Tr. 450. Finally, 

Plaintiff's neighbor wrote that twice weekly she assists 

Plaintiff in vacuuming, mopping, laundry, and other household 

chores and caring for Plaintiff's pet. Tr. 451. The ALJ 

noted that the treatments received and recommended by her 

treating physicians were conservative. See generally tr. 33-34. 

8 - OPINION AND ORDER 

Case 3:14-cv-01117-AA Document 24 Filed 07/22/15 Page 8 of 10
indicated that these statements are considered within the RFC 

evaluation, and the RFC reflects this through limitations in 

functional movements and public contact. 

However, the lay witnesses also provide opinions that do 

not stem from their observations or are otherwise not supported 

by the record. For example, Plaintiff's mother states that 

Plaintiff is bed ridden for two to three days at a time, which 

the ALJ found inconsistent with Plaintiff's daily activities. 

Tr. 44 7, 401. Some of Plaintiff's boyfriend's statements do not 

relate to Plaintiff's impairments but, instead, to a weakening 

emotional bond between Plaintiff and himself. Tr. 450. Finally, 

Plaintiff's neighbor broadly states that Plaintiff cannot 

perform simple daily tasks, which is counter to the Plaintiff's 

own daily activities. Tr. 98-101, 401, 451. Thus, the ALJ did 

not err in the evaluation of law witness statements. 

III. The ALJ's Evaluation RFC 

In arguing that the ALJ's evaluation of Plaintif£'s RFC was 

error, Plaintiff restates her arguments above. A court will 

affirm an ALJ's evaluation of Plaintiff's RFC if the ALJ applied 

proper legal standards and their decision is supported by 

substantial evidence in the record. Bayliss v. Barnhart, 427 

F.3d 1211, 1217 (9th Cir. 2005). As found above, the ALJ applied 

the proper legal standards in rejecting portions of Plaintiff's 

allegations ~nd the law witness statements. 

9 - OPINION AND ORDER 

Case 3:14-cv-01117-AA Document 24 Filed 07/22/15 Page 9 of 10
Further, substantial evidence exists within the record to 

support the ALJ' s RFC evaluation. The ALJ cited Dr. Kehrli' s 

assessment, concluding that Plaintiff should limit overhead 

reaching, only occasionally stoop, crawl and crouch, among other 

things. Tr. 34, 191-94, 204-07. Additionally, the ALJ found that 

Plaintiff must avoid exposure to respiratory irritants, have 

only occasional public contact, and have a stand/sit option and 

placed other restrictions on activities that impact the back, 

like climbing latters, stairs and ramps. Tr. 32. Thus, the ALJ's 

RFC considers Plaintiff's lower back limitations and her history 

of respiratory problems and use of inhalers. Tr. 9 6, 510, 7 53, 

7 69. Thus, because the ALJ applied the proper legal standards 

and his opinion is supported by substantial evidence in the 

record, the ALJ's evaluation of the RFC is affirmed. 

Conclusioh 

The.ALJ did not error in evaluating Plaintiff's credibility 

or the lay witnesses' statements. Thus, the ALJ did not error in 

the evaluation of Plaintiff's RFC. Therefore, the Commissioner's 

decision is AFFIRMED. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

'1..1 pD . Dated this -~---day of July, 2015. 

Ann Aiken 

U.S. District Judge 

10. OPINION AND ORDER 

Case 3:14-cv-01117-AA Document 24 Filed 07/22/15 Page 10 of 10