Opinion ID: 613955
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Weight Given to Physician Opinions

Text: 3 Social security regulations provide guidelines for the ALJ in evaluating medical opinion evidence. See id. § 404.1527. The ALJ may consider many factors when weighing medical evidence, including the claimant’s relationship with the examining or treating physician, whether a medical opinion is wellsupported, whether a medical opinion is consistent with the claimant’s record, and a doctor’s specialization. See id. § 404.1527(d). Generally, the opinions of examining or treating physicians are given more weight than non-examining or non-treating physicians unless “good cause” is shown to the contrary. See id. § 404.1527(d)(1), (2); Lewis v. Callahan, 125 F.3d 1436, 1440 (11th Cir. 1997). We have found “good cause” where the opinion was conclusory or inconsistent with the physician’s own medical records or where the evidence supported a contrary finding. See Lewis, 125 F.3d at 1440. Finally, the opinions of specialists regarding medical issues related to his area of specialty generally are given more weight than the opinions of non-specialists. See id. § 404.1527(d)(5). As our limited review precludes us from reweighing the evidence, we will find no reversible error when the ALJ has articulated specific reasons for failing to give the opinion of a treating physician controlling weight, if those reasons are supported by substantial evidence. See Moore v. Barnhart, 405 F.3d 1208, 1212 (11th Cir. 2005) (per curiam). Additionally, the ultimate issue of disability is left 4 to the determination of the Commissioner, and, thus, a statement by a medical source that a claimant is “disabled” or “unable to work” is not binding on the ALJ. § 404.1527(e)(1). Here, we are satisfied that the ALJ’s articulated reasons for failing to accord controlling weight to Dr. Jones’s opinion are supported by substantial evidence. We cannot reweigh the evidence related to Wilcox’s claim anew; thus, we conclude that the ALJ did not err by giving greater weight to the medical opinion of a non-treating specialist than to Wilcox’s own treating physician.