Opinion ID: 2651318
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: ALJ’s Full Development of the Record

Text: Finally, T.R.C. argues that the ALJ failed to fully develop the record when he failed to: (1) “re-contact the expert who provided the Psychological Evaluation for any question(s) regarding the validity of the IQ score”; and (2) obtain an updated IQ test score. Generally, an ALJ has “a basic obligation to develop a full and fair record.” Ellison v. Barnhart, 355 F.3d 1272, 1276 (11th Cir. 2003). Nevertheless, the claimant carries the burden of proving that she is disabled, and, thus, is responsible for producing evidence to support her claim. Id. Moreover, the ALJ is not required to order a consultative examination if the record contains sufficient evidence for the ALJ to make an informed decision. Ingram v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 496 F.3d 1253, 1269 (11th Cir. 2007). Because T.R.C. did not identify whom the ALJ should have re-contacted regarding the validity of the IQ score, she has waived that argument. See McClain of Ga., Inc., 138 F.3d at 1422. Moreover, it was T.R.C.’s responsibility to provide an updated test score. See Ellison, 355 F.3d at 1276. Finally the record contained sufficient evidence including inter alia, several medical and other reports from 9 Case: 13-12511 Date Filed: 01/28/2014 Page: 10 of 10 examiners from UAC, Ms. Wisely, Dr. Lowery, Dr. Estock, and another unidentified examiner as well as T.R.C. and her mother’s testimony, for the ALJ to make an informed decision. See Ingram, 496 F.3d at 1269. Accordingly, upon review of the record and consideration of the parties’ briefs, we affirm. AFFIRMED. 10