## In the



# U n ited S ta tes Co urt o f Ap p ea ls

F o rth eS e v e n th C ir cu it
N o. 11

- 3232 V IR GIL M. S HAUGER, P laint if f-A ppell ant, v. M ICHAEL J. A S T RUE, C om m issi one r of So ci alS ecuri ty, D efend a nt-A pp ellee.

A pp eal from the United S t ates Di strictC our t fo r the Western Di stricto f Wisc onsin
. No . 3:1 1-cv-00 12 9-bbc

—Barb ara B. C rab b , Ju dge

.
A RG UE D F EB RU AR Y 29, 2012

— D ECI DE D M AR CH 22, 2012

Befo re B AUER, R O V NE R an d W OO D , C ircu it Judges . B AUER, C ircui tJudg e . V irg il M . Sh au ge r, a 50 -ye ar -old f or m erwelderwh o suffer s fro m a nerv e d isorderthat i m pa i r s h i s v i s i o n, c ha l l e ng e s the de ni a lo fh i s a pp l i cati o n fo r Soci alS ec ur i tydi sabi l i tyb en efi ts
. An Adm i nist ra tiv e L aw Ju d ge (“A L J”) d isb elie ve d Sh au ge r’s te st im on y a b ou t t h e s ev er ity of h ea d ac h es ca u se d by h is c o nd i t i on, an d o n tha tb a s i s f o un d h i m no tdi s ab l e d.2 N o. 11

- 3232 Because thi s a dvers e credibi l i ty deter m i nati on i s no t supp or ted bysubst anti alev i dence, we re turn the cas e to the a gencyf orfurtherpro ceedi ngs.

I . B AC KGR OUND Shauge r oper ate d a weld in g com pany i n M i l w aukee , W isc on sin , from 19 89 to 20 04 . H e w as forc ed to se ll his busi ness i n A pril 2 00 4 afterthe sym ptom s o fhi s di sor d er h ad w o r s e n ed . Sh au ge r w as livin g in Flor id a in 2007wh en he appli ed fo r dis abi l i ty i nsurance benefi ts, alle gin g on se t in A p ril 20 04 . M ed ica l rec or d s o f h is vi si on probl em s date bac k t o l ate 19 88 w hen, atag e 2 7, he fi r sts o ught tr ea tmentf o r s y m pto m s i nc l udi ng double vi si on, ey e s tr ai n, and f aci alnum b n es s. Shauge r ha d e xp erience d sim il ar sym p tom s six m ont hs earli er, but thati ni ti albou t had cl ear ed aftera few days and so he di d not thi nk m or e about i t. A fte r a b atter y o fte sts , Shauge r w as diagnose d i n 198 8 with abducens ner ve pal sy ofthe l eft e ye. Thi s di sor der, co m m onl y know n as six th n er ve p als y, d es c rib es a p ar a l y s i s o f th e m u sc le contr ol l i ng later aley e m ove m ents. See D ORLA ND ’ S I LL US T RAT ED M EDICAL D ICTIO NA RY1365 (32d ed

. 2012). The tr eat m ent forsi xth n er ve pal sy depend s o n the c a us e . S e v e r a lc a us e s a r e c o mm o n a mon ga du l ts, i n c l u d i n g h e a d t r a u m a , i n fec tio n, d iab et es , bra in an eu ris m , m ult i ple scl er osi s, and tum or s. See Loyol a Un i ver si ty Ch i cago S tr itc h Schoolo fM edi ci ne, S i x t h N e r v e P a lsy, http: //w w w . str i tch. l uc. edu/depts/ ophtha/a du l t_s tr a bi sm us/s i xth_nerv e_pal sy. htm ( l ast vi si t e d Ma r . 1 9 , 2 0 1 2 ) ; U. S
. Na t i o na lLib r a r y o fMed i c i ne,N o. 11

- 3232 3 M e d lin e P l u s, C r a n i a l M o n o n e u r o p a t h y VI , http: // w w w . nl m . ni h. go v/ m edl i ne p lu s/ ency/ ar ti cl e/ 0006 90. htm ( l astvi si ted M ar . 19 , 20 12)
. S ym ptom s o f s i xth ne r v e p a l s y o ft e n i nc l ud e do ub l e v i s i o n, h e a dach es, and pai n ar ound the ey e. See Th e Uni v e r s i ty ofCal i f or ni a- I rv i ne Gavi n H erber t Eye I nsti t ut e, N euro - O p h tha l m o l ogy , h t t p : / / www . e y e . u c i
. edu / neuro ophthal m ol ogy. htm l #A bducensN er ve ( l astvi si ted M ar . 19 , 20 12 ) ; U. S
. N at i o na lLibr ar y o fM edi cine , M edl i ne P lu s, Cr an i al M on on e u r op athyVI , http: //w w w . nl m . ni h. gov/ m edl i neplus/ency/ ar ti cl e/ 0006 90. htm ( l astvi si ted M ar . 19 , 20 12 )
. Be ca us e th e tr ea tmentv ar i es b y et i o l o g y, phy si ci an s typi cal l y s tar t bygi vin g pati ents a ba rr age o fte sts to deter m i ne the cause o fthe pal sy. See U
. S. N ational L ibrary of M ed icin e, M ed lin e P lu s, Cran i al M ononeurop at hy VI, http: // w w w. nl m. ni h. g o v / med l i ne pl us / e nc y / a r t i cl e/ 0006 90. htm ( l astvi si ted M ar . 19 , 20 12)
. So m e ca ses o fsi xth ner v e pa l s y g o a wa y o n the i r o wn, a nd o the rs m ay persi st. Id

. Shaug er s pecula tes thathi s pal sy ste m s fro m head tr au m a su ffer ed i n 1 98 8 when he fel l 13 o r 1 4 fee t o n a we l di ngj o b , a nd l a nd e d o n the l e fts i de o fh i s f a c e o n th e concr ete
. H i s fi rs t s ym ptom s s urf aced afterthi s a ccident. I n 1988 and 1 989, hi s doctor s ra n severa l clinic al te st s to deter m i ne the cause o fhi s pal sy, i ncl ud i ng an M RI and an ang i ogr ap hy. N o speci fi c ca use e verwas f ound. Shauge r continued working and did notse ek t r e a t me n ta g a i n u n t i l 19 9 6 , a ft e r h i s v i s i o n p r o b l e ms had w or sened and he s tar ted exper i enci ng hea daches. S ha ug e r h a d t r i e d s e v e r a lty pe s ofgl as s e s , b utthe h e a dac he s per si st ed. A ne ur o l o g i stc o nfi rm ed th e pr ev i o us4 N o. 11

- 3232 d iagnosis of left sixth nerve pa lsy ( he de scribed Shau ger’s affl i ct i o n as “r athe r r emar k ab l e” ) , but fur th ert es ting a g a i n f a i l e d to i de n t i fy th e r o o tc a u s e . A n o c u l a r e x a mi nati on in 199 8 s how ed that Shauger’s p al sy w as m ar ked b y hy pe r t r o pi a a nd di pl o pi a . Hy pe r t r o pi a i s a m i sal i g nm en t o f th e ey e, an d di pl o pi a i s do ubl e visi on. D ORLA ND ’ S I LL US T RAT ED M ED ICAL D ICTIO NA RY52 5, 89 8 ( 32d ed. 2 0 1 2 )
. In J ul y 2 0 0 7, a mo nth b e f o r e h e a pp l i ed f ordi sabi l i ty benefi ts, S haugerco nsul ted an o pt om et ri st w ho co ncl ud ed that he st i l lsuffer ed from doubl e v i si on and prescr ibed gl asses. The Com m i ssi onero fS oci al S e c ur i t y c o nt e nd s that thi s do c t o r p r e s c r ib e d prism g l as se s, whi chc anhe l p c o r r ec t do ubl e vi si o n b y s hi fting the i m age ente ring the affecte d eye an d a l l owing f or c oo rd in at ed vis ion w ith les s la te ra l m ov em en t in th at ey e. A m er ica n O p to m et ric A ss oc iat ion, St r ab i s m us , http: //w w w . aoa . or g/x4700. xm l( l astvi si ted M ar . 19 , 2012 )
. The ey egl ass es presc ri pti on i s ind eci phe rabl e, th ou g h Shau ger has not d ispu ted the C om m issi one r’s i nt er pr et at i o n. A fterS haugerfi l ed hi s di sabi l i ty claim i n A ugust 2 007, se ve r alo th er d octor s ev alua te d hi s co ndi ti o n. Dr
. M ar th a Pol l ock, an inter ni st, exam i ned Shaugeri n Octobe r at th e r eque sto fthe F l o r i da Depa r tment of Hea l tha nd c o n fi r me d th e d i a g n o s i s o fl e fts i x th n e r v e pa l sy . T wo o the r do c t o r s then r e v i e we d S ha ug e r ’ s me di c a lr e c o r ds f or th e s t a t e a g e nc y . T he fi r s t, a n o ph tha l mol o g i s t, opi ne d tha tp r i s m g l a s s e s s ho ul d mi ni mi z e o r e l i mi na te Shauge r’ s d ou b le vi si on in al lga zes exce pt dir ectly t o the l eft. Even so , the ophthal m ol ogi st ad vi sed S hauger sh ou ld a v oid co n c en tr at ed ex p os u re to h az ar d ou s c on d i-N o. 11

- 3232 5 ti ons no m att erhow succes sfu lpri sm gl ass es m i ght b e. T he seco n d doc tor, an OB /G Y N , opine d that Shau ger, du e t o h i s b a l a nce di ffi c ul t i e s , a l wa y s s ho ul d a v o i d l a dd e r s , r o p e s , a n d s c a ff o l d s a n d o nl y r a r e l y s h o u l d c l i mb ra m ps orst air s. Thi s co nsul tant al so re com m ended that Shauge r avo i d even m oder ate exposur e t o hazar dous m achi nery . T h e a ge n c y d en ied Sh au ge r’s d isa b ility cla im init ially an d o n r ec o ns i der at i o n, a nd he r ec ei ve d a he ar i ng be f o r e anALJ i n Jul y 2 00 9. S ha ug ert es ti fi ed th athe l a s t wo r k e d i n 2 0 0 4 wh e n h e wa s f o r c e d t o s e l l h i s c o mpan y b ec au se of h is impai r ed vi si o n. At the t i m e o fthe he ar i ng, S ha ug ers ti l ls uffer ed from do ubl e vi si o n, a nd h e e x p lain ed th at h e m u s t t u rn h is h ea d to th e le ft in o r de r t o f o c us h i s e y e s . Lo o k i ngs t r a i g hta he a d, h e s a i d, causes ey e s tr ai n and burni ng, wateryey es. H ead aches seti n after15 m i nut es o f t ry i ng to f ocus, so he c annot re ad or w atch TV f or m or e than bri ef peri ods. H e t est i fi ed that m ostdays he suffer s tw o orthree s ev er e hea daches las tin g 3 0 t o 4 5 m in u te s e ac h, w h i c h f o r c e h im to lie d ow n an d s h u t h is e ye s w ith a c oo l co m p re ss on h is f or ehead. S haugerexpl ai ned that he r elie d on ibuprofen and eye drops but did notta ke any pr escr i pti on m edi cati ons. H e t est i fi ed that seve ra lt im es he had tr i ed co v e r i n g th e a ffe c t e d e y e wi th a p a t c h b u t h e s a w no i m prove m ent in hi s ba lan c e or depth percepti on. W hen ask ed by hi s a tto rneywh etherhe c onti nued to se e e ye spe ci al i st s an d ne ur o l o g i st s, S ha ug er an swe r ed th at he di d no t be ca us e he ha d b ee n t o l d the r e was no th i ng m or e they c oul d do.6 N o. 11

- 3232 The ALJ a l so s o l i ci te d t est i m o ny fr o m a n int erni sta nd a vo cation alexper t. Dr. S am iN af oo sihad re vi ew ed S ha ug er ’ s m edi ca lr ec o r ds an d list en ed whi l e he tes ti fi ed but di d not e xam i ne Sh au ger . H e a sse rt ed that S ha ug er ’ s di so r derdo es no t m eet o r e qua la l i st i ng but does pre vent hi m fro m ta ki ng jobs r equi ring depth perce pti on, es peci al l y pos i ti ons re quir i ng e xposure to he ights, h e a v y m ach inery, or open w ater. Dr. N afoosi’ s di r ec t te st i m o ny s pan s l es s th ant wo page s o fthe hear i ng tr anscr i pt, and he did not eve n m en ti on Shauge r’ s com pla i nts ofdi sabl i ng hea daches. W hen cr oss exam i ned about that subj ect, Dr. N af oo sico nceded th ats i xth n er ve pa l sy“ co ul d r es ul t i n h ea dac he ” but a s s e r t e d, wi tho ute xp l a na t i o n, tha tS ha ug e r ’ s h e a da c he s wo uld not b e s e v e r e e no ugh t o r e qu i r e u ns c he dule d bre aks duri ng the co urse o fthe w or kday o r “further l i m i t hi m . ” The ALJ a sk ed no f o l l o w-u p que st i o ns . The voca ti onalexper t a ckno w l edged thatS haugercannot p er f or m hi s pastwork ofweldi ng but sugge ste d that a per son ofS hauger ’ s a ge, educati on, work exp er i ence, an d lim ita ti o ns i s qua l i fi ed f o r a va i l ab l e j o bs i ncl udi ng“ di ni ngr o o m a tt en dan t, ” “ki tc he n h el per, ” an d

“ l a un dr y wo r k e r . ” T he v o c a t i o na le xp e r tc o nc e de d, though, thatS haugeri s unem plo yabl e i fhi s hea daches re quir e unschedul ed, 30

- m inute br eak s tw o orthr ee ti m es daily. H e a l so conceded thatther e co uld be a si gni f i c a nte r o s i o n o fp o t e nt i a lj o b o pt i o ns i fS ha uger has di ffi cul ty w or ki ng i n sm al l, nar ro w p l aces l i ke a k i tc he n. One mo n th a ft e r th e h e a r i n g, S h a u g e r i n i t i a t e d a c o nsul tat i on with Dr. M ax im G or el i k, an o phthalm ol ogi st.N o. 11

- 3232 7 Dr. Gore l i k e choed the p ri ordi agno si s o fl eft s i xth nerv e pal sy, and sta ted thatdoubl e v i si on a nd d ep th perce pti on pre vent Sha u ger fro m sa fel y work i ng i n an en vi r o nm en t th atr eq ui r es ha nd- ey e co o r d i n a t i o n. Dr
. Go r el i ka l so o pi ne d tha t prism gl as se s m i g ht provi de s o me r e l i e f

. S ha ug e r ’ s l a wy e r f or w ar ded D r. G or elik ’s re p or t t o th e A L J. I n J anuary20 10 the AL J r ej ecte d Shauger ’ s di sabi l i ty cl ai m , c o nc l udi ngtha t he c o ul d t r an si ti o n fr o m wel di ng to othe r w or k. A pp l yi ng the r equi re d fi ve- ste p anal ysi s, s e e 2 0 C. F
. R. § 4 0 4
. 1 5 2 0 ( a ) ( 4 ) , the ALJ de t e r mi ne d t hat ( 1) S ha ug erha d no t en g ag ed i n s ubs ta nt i alg ainful acti vi ty fro m hi s a l l ege d onseti n 200 4 thro ugh hi s date l as t i ns ur ed i n 2 00 7, ( 2) hi s l eft si xth n er ve pa l syc o nsti tutes a seve re i m pai rm ent, ( 3) thi s i m pai rm en t d oes not m eeto r equa l a lis ted i m pai rm ent, ( 4) S hauger co ul d no tp e r f o r m h i s p a s tr e l e v a n two r ko fwe l d i ng th ro u gh th e d at e la st ins u re d , an d (5 ) th er e e x istj ob s in th e e c on om y h e s till co u ld p er for m . Th e A L J sa id little about Shauge r’ s hea daches. S he wrote that S hauger “com pla i ns o fheadaches ” but re aso ned that they m ust be “ non- seve re ” be cause he w as not usi ng pre scr i pti on dr ug s an d

— so the ALJ tho ug ht

— ha d ne ve r s o ug ht m edi calcar e forthem

. The A LJ di d not a cknowle dge Shau g e r ’ s t e s t i mon y ab o utthe s e v e r i t y a nd fr e qu e nc y ofhi s hea dach es , hi s r esponse to tho se headaches, o r th e effec t th e he ada ch es ha ve o n h i s d ail y a ct i vi ti es . S he opi ned that he had the re si du alfuncti onalcapaci ty to p er for m a fu ll ran ge of w or k a t a l l ex er tio n al lev els thro ugh the date l ast in su re d and gave the “ gr eat est w ei ght” to the opi ni on of Dr. N af oo si
. The A LJ a ss er ted8 N o. 11

- 3232 that Shauge r’ s “ sta tem en ts concerni ng the i ntensi ty, p ersisten ce, and l im iti ng effects ” of his sym p to m s w ere “not cre dibl e to t h e e xtent they a re i nconsi ste nt with th e a b ov e re sid u al fu n c tio n al c ap ac ity as se ss m en t.” Sh e c i ted wh at she c hara cter i zed as a “spar se and spora d ic” tre at m en t h ist o r y for six th n er ve p als y a n d h is pu r po r t e d fa i l ur e t o “ e v e r ” s e e kt r e a t men tf o rh e a dac he s. The A L J a l so di sc r edi te d S ha ug er ’ s te st i m o ny that doctor s had sa i d nothi ng el se coul d be done f or hi s co nd i ti on. H i s t est i m ony, the A LJ r eas oned, was contr adic ted byDr. G or el i k’ s o pini on that Shauger m i ght b enefi t fro m pri sm gl ass es. S haugerchal l enged th e AL J ’ s dec i si o n in the di st r i ctc o ur t, l ost, a nd now appeal s.

II. DI S C US S I ON O n ap p ea l, Sh au ge r ar gu es th at th e A L J err ed in fin d in g h im n otcr ed ible . B ec au se t h e A p p ea ls C ou n c il den i e d r e v i e w, we e v a l u a t e th e AL J ’ s d e c i s i o n a s the fi na l w ord of th e C om m issi one r. See Sc ot tv. As t r ue, 64 7 F
. 3 d 7 3 4 , 7 3 9 ( 7 th Ci r . 2 0 1 1 )
. Ou r r e v i e w i s c o nfi ne d to th e ra tio n ale s o ffer ed by th e A L J, see S E C v . C hen ery C o rp ., 31 8 U .S. 8 0, 93 -95 (19 43 ); Steele v. B a rnh a rt, 29 0 F
. 3d 93 6, 9 41 ( 7th Ci r . 2 00 2) , a nd a sks whethe r the ALJ ’ s de c i s i o n i s s up po r t e d b y s ub s t a nt i a le v i de nc e, 42 U .S.C . § 40 5(g ); O ’ Connor

- Spi nne rv. As t r ue, 62 7 F
. 3d 614, 61 8 ( 7th Ci r. 20 10)
. W e g i ve an A LJ’ s cr edibi l i ty deter m i nati on s peci al, bu t not unli m i ted, defer ence. Jone s v. As t r ue, 623 F.3 d 1 1 5 5 , 11 60 (7t h C ir. 20 10 ); Vil l ano v. As t r ue, 556 F
. 3d 558, 56 2 ( 7th Ci r. 20 09)
. The A LJ m ustN o. 11

- 3232 9

co ns i dera numbe r o ff ac tors i m po se d b y r egul at i o n, see 20 C.F.R
. § 404. 1529 ( c) ; S
. S. R. 96

- 7p, 19 96 W L 37418 6, an d m u st su p p or t c r e d ibilit y fin d in gs w ith ev id en c e in the r e c o r d, Vi l l ano , 55 6 F
. 3d at 562. Sha ug er begins by c o rrectly noting th at th e A L J’ s i ni ti ale xpl an at i o n fo r di sb el i ev i nghi s te st i m o ny

— that hi s “ sta tem ents concerni ng the i ntensi ty, per si ste nce, an d lim itin g e ffec ts ” o f h is s ym p to m s w er e “ n otcr ed ible to the exte nt they are i nc ons istent w ith” th e j ud ge’s ass ess m ent of hi s re si du al functi on al capaci ty

— i s m ea ni ngl ess bo i l er pla te see n fre quentl y in dec isions fro m A L Js. W e ha ve c rit iciz ed th is tem p lat e a s u n h elp fu l, Bjor ns on v. As t r ue, N o. 11 -22 42 , 201 2 W L 28 07 36 , at *4 (7t h C ir. Jan . 31, 20 12 ); Parke rv. As t r ue, 59 7 F .3d 9 20, 92 1- 22 (7t h C ir. 20 1 0 ) , a n d ex p lain ed th at it ba c kw ar d ly “i m pl i es tha t th e ab i l i tyt o wor ki s det erm i ne d fi r sta nd is th en u se d to d et er m in e th e claim an t’s c r ed ibilit y,” Bjo r ns on , 2 0 1 2 WL 2 8 0 7 3 6 , a t* 5
. Cr e dib i l i t y fi nd i ngs m ust hav e su p p or t in the re cor d, and hackneye d l an g ua g e se en uni ve r sa l l y i n AL J dec i si o ns ad d s no th

i ng. See P un z io v. A strue, 63 0 F
. 3d 70 4, 70 9 ( 7th Ci r. 2011); P a rker, 59 7 F
. 3d at 921- 22. Sh a ug e r p r i nc i pa l l y a r g ue s tha tthe ALJc o ul d no t di sc r edi t hi s te st i m o ny b as ed on a per ce pti o n o fune xpl aine d g aps i n h i s tr ea tmenthi st o r y . Al th o ug h a h i s t o r y o fs p o r adi c tr e a t me n to r th e f a i l u r e t o f o l l o w a tr eat m ent pl an can und er m i ne a cl ai m an t’s cre dibi l i ty, an A LJ m ust fi rs t e xplor e the claim an t’s re aso ns f or th e lack o f m ed ical care be fore draw ing a nega tive i nferen c e. S.S.R . 96-7 p , 199 6 W L 37 41 86 , at *7 ; M os s v. As t r ue,10 N o. 11

- 3232 55 5 F .3d 55 6, 56 2 (7 th C ir. 20 09 ); Craf tv. As t r ue, 53 9 F
. 3d 66 8 , 6 7 9 ( 7 th Ci r . 2 0 0 8 )
. An ALJma y n e e d t o “ ques ti on the ind i vi du ala t the adm i ni str ati ve proce edi ng i n or der to de te r m i ne whethe r the r e ar e g o o d r ea so ns the i nd ivid ual does notse ek m edi caltr eat m ent o r does not pu r s ue t r e a t men ti n a c o ns i s t e ntma nn e r . ” S
. S
. R. 9 6

- 7 p, 1996 W L 37418 6, at*7 . Th e cl ai m ant’ s “ goo d rea sons” m ay i ncl ud e a n i nabi l i ty to aff or d tre atm ent, i neffecti veness offurthertr eat m ent, o r i ntol er able s id e e ffects
. Id. at * 8. H er e, the A LJ m ade no eff or t t o questi on S hauger abou t t h e pe rceived gap s in his treatm en t history between 19 88 and 2009. M or e i m port antl y, the re aso n f orthe “g ap s” i s obvi ous. S ha ug ers uffer s fr o m a c o ndi ti o n tha t, b y de fi ni ti o n, m ay w ax and w ane. See U .S. N at ion al L ibr ar y of M ed ic in e, M ed lin e P lu s, Cr an i al Mo n o n e u r op at hy VI, http://w w w . nl m . ni h. go v/ m edl i neplus/ ency/ ar ti cl e/ 0006 90. htm ( l astvi si ted M ar . 19 , 20 12)
. S haug er has not cl ai m ed that hi s con d i ti on was di sabl i ng be f or e 2 004. A fte r h e w as d iag n os ed in 19 88 , h e su b m itt ed to a fu ll re gi m en o fd iag n ost i c te sts , but the underl yi ng ca use was ne ve r di sc o ve r ed. He conti nue d wor k i nga nd dealt w ith hi s i m pai rm ent. I t was notunti l19 96 that S h a u g e r ’ s i mpa i r me n tb ec ame mo r e p r o n o u n c e d

. As note d i n hi s m edic al rec or ds, S haugerhad “r em ai ned about stabl e” for ei ght y ear s but now suffer ed fro m “a r athe r r emar k ab l e l eft si xth pa l sy ” th atwas pre ci pi ta ting he ada ch es . Aga i n S ha ug erha d a b atte r y o ft es ts , i nc lu d in g a n an gio gr am an d a T e n silo n te st w ith th eir a s s o c i a t e d r i s k s , a nd a g a i n no c a us e wa s de t e r mi ne d. Ev e n s o , h e pr e s s e d o n wi th hi s j o b , t r e a t e d h i s h e a d-N o. 11

- 3232 11 aches w i th o ver - the- coun term edi cati ons, and tr i ed to live a n or m al life. It w as n otu n til 20 04 th at, by h is acco unt, S haugerno longe r coul d cope, and onl y then did he a pp l y fordi sabi l i ty. O n th e A L J’ s logi c, a p erson sufferi ng from an im p a irm ent that has notbec om e di sabl i ng m ust a c t an d seek tr ea tment as ifthe c o ndi ti o n is di sabl i ngo r e l se r un the ri sk that any future ass er ti on that the i m pai rm ent has w or sened wil lbe vie w ed as a l i e. W e hav e r eco gni zed that eve n pers ons w ho are di s ab l e d s o met i mes c o pe wi th th ei r i m pai r m en ts an d co nt i nue wor k i ng l ong afterthey m i ght ha ve been enti tl ed to bene fi ts. Se e G ent le v. B a rnh a rt, 43 0 F.3d 86 5, 86 7 (7th C i r . 2 00 5); Hawkin s v. Fi rs tU ni on Corp
. Lo ng- Ter m D i s ab i l i ty Pl an , 32 6 F.3d 91 4, 918 (7th Cir. 2003). Sha u g e r e m p ha sizes this p oint p articularly w ith his p ur p o r t ed l ack of treatm en t history f orhi s hea daches. N ot onl y di d the AL J f ai lto se ek an ex pl an at i o n fo r the pe r ce i ve d l ac ko ft reatment, b ut her anal ysi s r est s o n a m i sr eadi ng o fthe adm i ni str ati ve r ec o r d. In di sc r edi tingS ha ug er ’ s te st i m o ny abo utthe se ve r ity of h is h ea d ac h es , th e A L J as se rt s t h at “t h er e is no ind i cati on fro m the m edi calev i dence ofr eco rd that th e cl ai m an t ev ers o ug htt r ea tmentf o r he ada ch es . ” To the c ontr ar y, S hauger ’ s m edi c al rec or ds l eave no ro om f ordoubt that he i ni ti ate d the s eco nd r ound ofn euro l o g i c a l t e s t i ng i n 199 6 beca use he ha d ser i ous he adaches ste m m i ng fro m hi s l eft s i xth ner ve pal sy. Shauge r furtherdi sputes th e AL J ’ s co ncl usi on that he un d e r m ined his cred ibi li ty by testifying tha t d octors co ul d do no th i nge l se f o r hi s cond iti o n. Thi s st at ement12 N o. 11

- 3232 i s f al se, the A LJ s urm i sed, be c au se “in the 2009 tr eat
m en t no te, hi s doct orr eco m m ended a speci alty pe of gl as s e s t o h e l p wi th hi s ma l po s i t i o ning . ” S ha ug er cor re ctl y points ou t th at i t was July 20 09 whenhe t e s t i fi e d tha th i s t r e a t men to pt i o ns h a d b e e n e xh a us t e d, an d n otu n til Au gu s t 2009 thathe c onsul ted with Dr
. Go r e l i k, wh o r e c o mm e nd e d p r i s m g l ass es. T he ALJ re cei ved Dr. Gore l i k’ s r epor t a fterthe hear i ng. W hen iss u in g h e r d ec isio n in Ja n u ar y 2 01 0, th e A L J ap p ar en tly ove rl oo ked the ti m i ng o fS hauger ’ s co nsul tati on with Dr
. Go r el i kand thus, i n e ffec t, l ab el ed S ha ug er ’ s he ar i ng te st i m o ny a s f al se b ec au se he di d no t an ti cipa te the r es ul t o fa medi ca lv i si t th atwoul d no t o cc urunt i lthe follo w in g m on th . Th e C om m iss ion er arg u es th at th is m i scue s houl d not m att erbec ause Sh au gerhad bee n pr es cr ibe d the s ame ty pe o fg l as se s i n J ul y 2 007, b utthe AL J di d no t m en ti o n th e 20 07 pr es cr i pti o n, an d the ag en cymay no t bo l st erthe r ulingwi the vi den ce the AL J di d no t rely o n. See C hen ery, 31 8 U.S
. at93

- 95; Cam pb e l l v. As t r ue, 627 F.3d 299 , 307 (7th C ir. 2010). Fin ally , Sh au ge r c h alle n ge s th e A L J’s e va lu at ion of h is headaches, ar gui ng that she f ai l ed to proper l y c onsider th e r el ev an t ev i den ce i nc l udi ngh is da i l y a ct i vi ti es , the ti m i ng and durati on o fhi s headaches, and the m eas ures ta ke n to tr ea t th e h e a d a c h es . See 20 C
. F.R. § 404.1529(c); S
. S
. R. 9 6

- 7 p, 1 996 W L 3 74 1 8 6 , a t* 3
. We a g r e e . T he ALJ i gnor ed sev er alo fthe f acto rs l ist ed i n So ci alS ecuri ty Rul i ng9 6- 7p, i nc l udi ngtha t S ha ug ert es ti fi ed th at( 1) he cou ld n ot read or look at a com p ut er screen f or m ore th an1 0 to 1 5 m i nut es wi th o utg et tinga he ada ch e, ( 2) he deal t with the p ain by l yi ng down with a co l d com press a nd c l osingh i s e y e s f o r 3 0 t o 4 5 mi nu t e s , ( 3 ) the h e a d-N o. 11

- 3232 13 aches occur re d at unschedul ed ti m es, two orthr ee ti m es a day, (4) hi s wife handl es al lhouse hol d accounts b e c a us e h e c anno t, a nd ( 5 ) h e s o ughtt r e a t men tf o r h e a daches as f arbac k a s 1 996. See 20 C. F
. R. § 40 4. 15 29 ( c) ; S
. S
. R. 96- 7p, 19 96 W L 37418 6, at * 3. W i thout any di scussi on o f th e s e r e l e v a n t f a c t o r s , th e AL J f a i l e d t o b ui l d a l o g i ca lb r i dge b etwee n the e vi den ce a nd he r c o nc l usi on that S hau ger’ s t est i m ony w as not cre dibl e. See Vil l ano , 55 6 F
. 3d at 562. I n re sponse to thi s a rgum ent, the Com m i ss ioner assert s tha t the A L J reason ably con side red Dr. N afoosi’ s re prese ntati on that S hauger ’ s hea daches had notbee n seve re . W e r ej ect thi s co ntenti on. T h e A LJ di d not m enti on thi s a spect ofDr. N afoo si’s tes ti m ony despit e sa yin g t h at s h e h ad giv en th e g re at es t w eig h t t o h is opi ni on. M or eov er, r el i ance on Dr. N af oo si ’ s s up er fi ci al test im o n y i n gen eral, and this statem en t in particu lar, woul d ha ve b ee n pr o bl emat i c. Dr
. Naf o o sidi d not hi nt that h e h ad exper i ence w i th pati ents affl i cted with si xth ne r ve pal sy, no r di d he sa y an y thing s ug g es ting kn ow led ge of th e sev er ity of he ad ac h es t y p i c ally as so c iat ed w ith th is a fflict ion . H e h ad n otp er so n ally ex ami ne d S ha ug er, a nd, l i k e th e AL J, s ai d no th i ngabo ut the e xtensi ve tes ti ng co n d u cted in 199 6 a fterS hauger ha d com pla i ned about seve re headaches

. N o f actual ev i den ce i n th e r ec o r d c o nt r adi ct s S ha ug er ’ s te st i m o ny ab ou t the se ver i ty ofhi s hea daches, and Dr. N af oo si offer ed no m edi cal re aso n f or doubti ng Shauge r’ s s tateme n t s . In s t e a d , i ts e e ms t o u s th a tD r . Na f o o s iwe nt be y ond the pe r m i ss ibl e bo unds o fa medi ca le xpe r t an d usurped the AL J ’ s r ol e bym aking hi s o w n cr edibi l i ty ass es sm ent a ftero bser vi ng S haugerte sti fy. Se eAl l e n v .14 N o. 11

- 3232 C om m ’rof Soc. Se c. , 56 1 F .3d 6 46, 65 2 ( 6th Ci r. 20 09) ( “[ C]r edibi l i ty deter m i nati ons w i th r espectto subj ecti ve c om p lain ts of p ain res t w ith th e A L J.”); Ha ck er v. B a rnh a rt, 459 F. 3d 934, 93 6 ( 8th Ci r. 20 06) ( “I t [ i s] the A LJ’ s t ask to res olv e c on flict s in th e e vid en c e a n d iss u es of cr ed ib i l i t y . ” ) ; S
. S. R. 9 6

- 7 p, 1 9 9 6 WL 3 74 1 8 6 , a t* 4 ( “ Th e a dj ud i cato r m ust then m ake a fin d i ng o n the cre dibi l i ty of the ind i vi du al ’ s s tat em ents. ”). W i thout any b asi s for Dr. N af oo si ’ s o pini on, the A LJ had the duty to devel op a fu l la nd f a i r r e c o r d. Se eNe l m s v. As t r ue, 5 5 3 F
. 3d 1093 , 1098 ( 7th Ci r. 20 09)
. A nd ye t the A LJ di d not a sk Dr
. Naf o o sia ny f o l l o w-u p que st i o ns t o de te r m i ne w h at m ed ica l ex p lan at ion, i f an y, h e h ad for h is ske pti ci sm a b ou t the se ver i ty ofS hauger ’ s hea daches. Se eBjo r ns on , 20 12 W L 28073 6, at * 7- * 8 ( concl ud i ng tha t i t was i m po ss ibl e to di sc ern b as i s f o r no n-exami ni ng d o c t o r ’ s e x p r e s s e d s k e p t i c i s m ab o u tc l a i ma n t ’ s c o mp lain ts of p ain ); C am pbel l , 6 27F
. 3d at3 08

- 09 ( co nc l udi ng th atALJ di d no t ade qua te l y e xpl ain re as o n fo r r ely i ng o n o pi ni o n o fno n- ex ami ni ngmedi ca le xpe r t who tes ti fi ed that c laim an t was st i l ldri nki ng dai l y when record s show ed clai m an t w as sobe r).

I I I . C ONC L US I ON Forth e r eas ons sta ted her ei n, we R EV ERSE the j ud g men to fthe d i s t r i c tc o ur ta nd R EMA ND the case w ith instructi ons that i t be r etur ned to the S SA fo r fur th erpr o ce eding s co ns i st en t wi ththi s o pi ni o n.

3- 22- 12