Opinion ID: 1302959
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: State Agency Opinions

Text: Finally, Wildman argues that the ALJ erred when he disregarded state agency psychologists' opinions. In 2003 and 2004, nonexamining state agency psychologists concluded that Wildman had moderate limitations in her ability to complete a normal workday and workweek without interruptions from psychologically based symptoms and to perform at a consistent pace without an unreasonable number and length of rest periods. One of the psychologists elaborated that Wildman's treatment history is suggestive of periodic moderate interference in her ability to regularly complete a typical work week. The ALJ disregarded these and other state agency opinions because they did not have access to all of the medical evidence in the record. First, we note that the opinions of nonexamining sources are generally . . . given less weight than those of examining sources. Willcockson v. Astrue, 540 F.3d 878, 880 (8th Cir.2008); see 20 C.F.R. § 404.1527(d)(1). The regulations also provide that, when evaluating a nonexamining source's opinion, the ALJ evaluate[s] the degree to which these opinions consider all of the pertinent evidence in [the] claim, including opinions of treating and other examining sources. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1527(d)(3); see also id. § 404.1527(f) (discussing rules for evaluating nonexamining state agency opinions). Here, we find it significant that the state agency evaluators did not have access to medical records from 2005 and 2006most notably Dr. Burstain's treatment notes from that period that document Wildman's repeated noncompliance. The state agency doctors also did not have the opportunity to review Dr. Michaelson's mental status exams. Moreover, we are not convinced that there would have been a different outcome in this case if the ALJ had given more weight to the state agency opinions. First, the psychologists' reports contain statements that raise concerns about Wildman's credibility and seriously question the conclusions of Drs. Marchman and Kikendall. They also concluded that Wildman was [n]ot significantly limited in her ability to maintain regular attendance, and one report states that Wildman's [c]oncentration and memory were broadly intact. Moreover, nonexamining state agency physicians determined that Wildman could lift twenty pounds occasionally and ten pounds frequently, sit six hours in an eight-hour workday, and stand six hours in an eight-hour workday. The physicians also questioned the credibility of Wildman's subjective complaints. Indeed, one physician went so far as to state that [t]he evidence in file was inconsistent with all the allegations. Accordingly, we do not think the ALJ erred when he disregarded the state agency opinions.