Opinion ID: 6496301
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Severity of Affective Disorders

Text: Relevant here, the ALJ concluded at step two of the disability analysis that Wilson’s diagnoses of bipolar disorder, depression, and anxiety were not severe under 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c) because they only minimally limit her “ability to perform basic mental work activities.” In reaching this conclusion, the ALJ considered four broad areas of mental functioning: (1) understanding, remembering, or applying information; (2) interacting with others; (3) concentrating, persisting, or maintaining pace; and (4) adapting or managing oneself. See id. § 404.1520a(c)(3). After a thorough review of Wilson’s medical records, the ALJ concluded that Wilson experienced only a mild limitation in each area and accordingly that her affective disorders were not severe. See id. § 404.1520a(d)(1). 4 Case: 21-60663 Document: 00516375131 Page: 5 Date Filed: 06/29/2022 No. 21-60663 Wilson argues that the ALJ impermissibly cherry-picked evidence supporting the ALJ’s conclusion and failed to consider evidence establishing that Wilson’s affective disorders were severe and worsening. However, our review of the record indicates that in totality, the ALJ considered Wilson’s intellect, memory, problem-solving skills, self-isolation, stress tolerance, mood swings, anger-management issues, ability to get along with others, punctuality, demeanor, and medication concerns. We accordingly reject Wilson’s contention that the ALJ’s review of the record regarding her affective disorders was impermissibly narrow. Wilson also argues that the opinion of the non-examining medical consultant “mischaracterized” the reports upon which he based his conclusion that Wilson’s mental health issues were not severe. This argument is about the phrase “laughed easily,” which Wilson claims misinterprets “tried to maintain a sense of humor.” We conclude this argument is one of semantics and does not affect the ultimate outcome by the ALJ. Finally, in this category Wilson further takes issue with the ALJ’s statement that Wilson had worked since her mental health diagnoses. The ALJ might have been relying on earlier diagnoses rather than those occurring after she left work, but even assuming arguendo the ALJ’s statement in this regard was error, it was harmless. See Audler, 501 F.3d at 448. The ALJ was clear that Wilson did not perform substantial gainful activity from the alleged onset of disability date of August 1, 2015, and the ALJ acknowledged that Wilson’s depression and anxiety developed in 2016. So, we need not address this argument further. In sum, bearing in mind our limited role and inability to reweigh the evidence or substitute our judgment for that of the ALJ’s, see id. at 447, we 5 Case: 21-60663 Document: 00516375131 Page: 6 Date Filed: 06/29/2022 No. 21-60663 hold that substantial evidence supported the ALJ’s conclusion that Wilson’s affective disorders were not severe.