Opinion ID: 164103
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: ALJ’s Hypothetical Question

Text: When an ALJ propounds a hypothetical question to a vocational expert, the question “must include all (and only) those impairments borne out by the evidentiary record.” Evans v. Chater , 55 F.3d 530, 532 (10th Cir. 1995). Plaintiff claims the ALJ failed to propound a proper hypothetical question to the vocational expert because the ALJ failed to include her alleged mental impairment in his hypothetical question. We disagree. -16- As discussed above, while Dr. Royal diagnosed plaintiff as suffering from a chronic pain disorder, there is insufficient evidence in the record to establish a basis for treating the disorder as a separate mental impairment for purposes of steps two, four, and five of the evaluation process. Moreover, the ALJ properly evaluated plaintiff’s allegations of severe and disabling pain as part of his analysis of the physical injuries to plaintiff’s back and neck. Accordingly, the ALJ did not err by failing to include plaintiff’s alleged mental impairment in his hypothetical question to the vocational expert. The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. Entered for the Court Timothy M. Tymkovich