Court Opinion

ID: 9838661
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-07 15:01:49.923976+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:52:38.278033
License: Public Domain

USCA11 Case: 22-13053    Document: 29-1      Date Filed: 09/07/2023   Page: 1 of 21

                                                    [DO NOT PUBLISH]
                                    In the
                 United States Court of Appeals
                         For the Eleventh Circuit

                           ____________________

                                 No. 22-13053
                           Non-Argument Calendar
                           ____________________

        MILY CABRERA,
                                                       Plaintiﬀ-Appellant,
        versus
        COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,

                                                     Defendant-Appellee.

                           ____________________

                  Appeal from the United States District Court
                       for the Middle District of Florida
                      D.C. Docket No. 6:21-cv-00099-JRK
                           ____________________
USCA11 Case: 22-13053     Document: 29-1      Date Filed: 09/07/2023    Page: 2 of 21

        2                     Opinion of the Court                 22-13053

        Before WILSON, LAGOA, and LUCK, Circuit Judges.
        WILSON, Circuit Judge:
               Mily Cabrera appeals the district court’s order affirming the
        decision of the Social Security Administration (SSA) to deny her
        application for supplemental security income (SSI) and disability
        insurance benefits (DIB). Cabrera argues that the Administrative
        Law Judge (ALJ) improperly gave little to no weight to the opinions
        of Dr. Gustavo Ruiz, her mental health treating physician. After
        careful review of the record and the parties’ briefs, we reverse and
        remand.
                                 I. Background
               First, we will discuss Cabrera’s medical records. Next, we
        will address Cabrera’s written submissions to the SSA, known as
        Adult Function Reports, and her testimony before the ALJ. Last,
        we will detail the agency proceedings, the ALJ decision, and her
        appeals from the ALJ’s decision.
                                    A. Medical Records
               In January 2017, Cabrera’s primary care physician referred
        her for an initial evaluation to Deborah Rivera of Mindful Behav-
        ioral Healthcare, a licensed mental health counselor. Rivera noted
        the following: Cabrera had poor judgment, fair insight, intact
        memory, anxious and depressed mood, congruent and tearful af-
        fect, and was dressed casually. Cabrera reported a history of de-
        pression, anxiety, and suicide attempts. Rivera gave Cabrera a
USCA11 Case: 22-13053         Document: 29-1        Date Filed: 09/07/2023         Page: 3 of 21

        22-13053                  Opinion of the Court                                3

        referral for medication management and psychotherapy. Rivera
        diagnosed Cabrera with major depressive disorder, single episode,
        severe without psychotic features; unspecified anxiety disorder;
        and panic disorder without agoraphobia.
               The next month, Cabrera was involuntarily hospitalized un-
        der the Baker Act. 1 Dr. Tracy Macintosh of Osceola Regional Med-
        ical Center examined Cabrera. Dr. Macintosh noted that Cabrera’s
        psychiatrist requested hospitalization after seeing Cabrera had cut
        the words “HATE ME” 2 on her right arm and had multiple cuts in
        her left arm. Throughout the same hospital stay, Dr. Shahid Elahi
        examined Cabrera and reported that she had poor to fair judgment
        and insight, intact memory, anxious mood, and adequate concen-
        tration.
              Also in February 2017, Cabrera began meeting with Dr. Viv-
        ian Charneco from Mindful Behavioral Healthcare, who she con-
        tinued seeing monthly until June 2020. Dr. Charneco consistently
        found Cabrera to be anxious and depressed but reported

        1 In Florida, under the Baker Act, a person may be involuntarily hospitalized
        and examined if there is reason to believe they are mentally ill and: (1) the
        person has refused voluntary examination or is unable to determine if an ex-
        amination is needed; and (2) the person is likely to suffer from neglect and the
        refusal of examination could threaten their well-being or there is substantial
        likelihood that, without care or treatment, that person will cause serious bod-
        ily harm to themselves or others in the near future as evidenced by recent
        behavior. Fla. Stat. § 394.467.
        2 Later medical documents report that Cabrera cut the words “HIT ME,” ra-
        ther than “HATE ME” on her left arm.
USCA11 Case: 22-13053      Document: 29-1     Date Filed: 09/07/2023     Page: 4 of 21

        4                      Opinion of the Court                22-13053

        fluctuations in Cabrera’s sleeping habits and appetite. Cabrera’s
        concentration, insight, and judgment ranged from adequate to
        poor depending on the visit.
               In March 2017, Cabrera began seeing psychiatrist Dr. Ruiz
        from Mindful Behavioral Healthcare, who she continued to see
        monthly through May 2020. Dr. Ruiz consistently reported
        Cabrera to be anxious and depressed. Dr. Ruiz reported changes
        in Cabrera’s insight and judgment, which ranged from adequate to
        superficial, and her concentration, which ranged from adequate to
        diminished. Dr. Ruiz prescribed Cabrera a number of medications,
        including Klonopin, Zoloft, Lamictal, Seroquel, Temazepam, and
        Lamotrigine.
               In April 2017, Cabrera was again hospitalized after a suicide
        attempt. Dr. Hanish Sethi noted that Cabrera was hospitalized for
        cutting herself on her right leg and left wrist with suicidal attempt
        and ideations, anxiety, and depression. Dr. Sethi found Cabrera to
        have an anxious mood, congruent affect, good concentration, lim-
        ited judgment and insight, and impaired sleep.
                In July 2017, Dr. Ruiz reported Cabrera’s continued diagno-
        ses and noted that Cabrera has emotional limitations related to so-
        cial interaction and coping with stress and anxiety. Dr. Ruiz sug-
        gested that Cabrera would benefit from traveling with her emo-
        tional support pet to help alleviate these difficulties and enhance
        her ability to function independently.
             In August 2017, Dr. Katherine Pilarte of Hispanic Family
        Counseling diagnosed Cabrera with severe major depressive
USCA11 Case: 22-13053      Document: 29-1      Date Filed: 09/07/2023      Page: 5 of 21

        22-13053               Opinion of the Court                          5

        disorder in addition to the continued diagnosis of generalized anx-
        iety disorder. Dr. Pilarte also noted that Cabrera was suicidal, in
        distress, and had difficulty getting out of bed.
                In March 2018, Cabrera was involuntarily hospitalized for
        the second time under the Baker Act at Aspire Behavioral Center
        after law enforcement found her to be in distress at her residence
        and likely to cause serious bodily harm to herself. The intake
        screening document has little other information because Cabrera
        refused to complete the assessment.
                In June 2018, Dr. Ruiz reported in a mental impairment
        questionnaire that Cabrera had diagnoses of bipolar disorder, panic
        disorder with agoraphobia, and generalized anxiety disorder. He
        opined that Cabrera had a poor prognosis, with depressed mood,
        fatigue and lack of energy, feelings of guilt, indecision, difficulty
        concentrating, racing thoughts, poor attention, and anxiety. He
        found Cabrera to have: (1) moderate limitations in activities of
        daily living; (2) marked limitations in ability for social functioning;
        (3) moderate limitations in the ability to concentrate, persist and
        maintain pace; (4) four or more episodes of decompensation within
        a 12-month period, each at least two weeks duration; and (5) likely
        absences from work of more than four days per month due to her
        impairments or treatments.
               In September 2018, Dr. Ruiz reported in a mental impair-
        ment questionnaire that Cabrera had diagnoses of bipolar disorder,
        panic disorder without agoraphobia, and generalized anxiety disor-
        der. He reserved prognosis. Dr. Ruiz found Cabrera to have: (1)
USCA11 Case: 22-13053      Document: 29-1      Date Filed: 09/07/2023     Page: 6 of 21

        6                      Opinion of the Court                 22-13053

        moderate limitations in activities of daily living; (2) marked limita-
        tions in ability for social functioning; (3) marked limitations in the
        ability to concentrate, persist and maintain pace; (4) four or more
        episodes of decompensation within a 12-month period, each at
        least two weeks duration; and (5) likely absences from work of
        more than four days per month due to her impairments or treat-
        ments.
               In August 2019, Cabrera went to the hospital to be treated
        after a bicycle accident. She was riding in a large group when she
        flipped over the handlebars and had to receive care for her physical
        injuries. There were no notations concerning Cabrera’s mental
        health.
                Also in August 2019, Dr. Ruiz reported in a mental impair-
        ment questionnaire that Cabrera had diagnoses of bipolar disorder,
        panic disorder without agoraphobia, generalized anxiety disorder,
        and borderline personality disorder. He opined that Cabrera had a
        poor prognosis and had results that were suggestive of severe de-
        pression and severe anxiety. Dr. Ruiz found Cabrera to have: : (1)
        moderate limitations in activities of daily living; (2) marked limita-
        tions in ability for social functioning; (3) marked limitations in the
        ability to concentrate, persist and maintain pace; (4) four or more
        episodes of decompensation within a 12-month period, each at
        least two weeks duration; and (5) likely absences from work of
        more than four days per month due to her impairments or treat-
        ments.
USCA11 Case: 22-13053     Document: 29-1      Date Filed: 09/07/2023    Page: 7 of 21

        22-13053              Opinion of the Court                        7

                During the same time that Cabrera regularly saw Dr. Ruiz,
        Cabrera also regularly met with Dr. Charneco. In Cabrera’s June
        2020 appointment, Dr. Charneco noted that Cabrera felt worse,
        with difficulty sleeping, mood swings, and increased anxiety, an-
        ger, and irritation. Cabrera reported seeing shadows in the form of
        persons in her room, voices calling her when no one is there, and
        difficulty being around other people. Dr. Charneco noted
        Cabrera’s diagnoses as bipolar disorder, severe with psychotic fea-
        tures, most recent episode depressed; panic disorder without ago-
        raphobia; generalized anxiety disorder; and borderline personality
        disorder.
                                 B. Non-Medical Evidence
               In May 2017, Cabrera completed an Adult Function Report
        where she checked that she was living at home with family.
        Cabrera described her daily activities as “taking medications and
        sleeping.” She is no longer able to enter a restaurant and be around
        people or noise. She has no problem dressing and feeding herself,
        but needs reminders to bathe, care for her hair, or shave. She needs
        to take medicine to sleep. She used to cook fresh meals, but now
        she prepares sandwiches and frozen food because she forgets what
        she puts on the stove. She does laundry once a month.
              In September 2017, Cabrera completed a second Adult Func-
        tion Report where she checked that she was living in an apartment
USCA11 Case: 22-13053         Document: 29-1        Date Filed: 09/07/2023         Page: 8 of 21

        8                         Opinion of the Court                       22-13053

        with friends. 3 Cabrera described her day as waking up, eating
        something, and then going back to bed; she does not have energy
        to do anything else. She is no longer able to be around people,
        socialize, or work. Cabrera does not care about her physical ap-
        pearance and dressing, bathing, caring for her hair, shaving, and
        feeding herself. She needs reminding to take a shower, brush her
        hair, and take medicine. She cannot sleep without medicine. She
        prepares sandwiches and frozen foods when she remembers. Her
        roommate does all the household chores. Cabrera drives if neces-
        sary and she shops in stores for food once a month. The only place
        she goes on a regular basis is to her monthly doctor’s appoint-
        ments, but she needs reminders and someone to accompany her.
        Cabrera does not have the patience to be around others because
        she gets panic attacks. She struggles to pay attention and follow
        written and spoken instructions. She noted that she cries for any
        reason, cuts herself, becomes aggressive when told what to do, and
        does not want to be alive.
               In February 2019, Cabrera completed a third Adult Function
        Report where she checked that she was living in an apartment with
        friends. Cabrera described her daily activities as waking up, some-
        times eating something, and stays in bed all the time. Her medica-
        tions make her slow and cause her to sleep too much, she has panic
        attacks at least three times a week, she gets mad and aggressive for

        3 While it’s unclear how many people actually lived in the apartment,
        Cabrera’s testimony at the ALJ hearing clearly indicates that she relies heavily
        on one roommate.
USCA11 Case: 22-13053      Document: 29-1      Date Filed: 09/07/2023     Page: 9 of 21

        22-13053               Opinion of the Court                         9

        no reason, and she does not like to be around people. She is no
        longer able to work, play sports, and be around people. Cabrera
        does not care about feeding herself, dressing, or caring for her hair.
        She sometimes shaves and bathes but said her illness affects her be-
        cause she fell in the bath. She needs reminding to take a shower,
        do her hair, and take her medicine. She cannot sleep without med-
        icine. She prepares sandwiches and frozen food but sometimes
        does not want to eat. Cabrera only goes outside to see the doctor
        and grocery shop about once a month when her friend is with her.
        She no longer drives and cannot go out alone because she gets lost.
        Cabrera does not have patience to be around others because she
        sometimes gets panic attacks or hits someone. She struggles in pay-
        ing attention and following instructions. Cabrera is scared to be
        around other people. She noted that she cries for any reason, cuts
        herself, gets aggressive, and sometimes does not want to be alive.
                In April 2019, Cabrera completed a fourth Adult Function
        Report where she checked that she was living in an apartment with
        friends. She describes her day as sleeping most of the time because
        she is too tired to live and does not want to talk to anyone. Cabrera
        does not care for her hair and shaves when possible. She needs
        reminding to take a shower, brush her hair, and take medicine. She
        cannot sleep without medicine. Cabrera states that she only eats
        cereal, but she sometimes prepares sandwiches and frozen foods
        and sometimes her roommate cooks for her. Her roommate shops
        for food for Cabrera. The only place she goes on a regular basis is
        her monthly visits to the doctor’s office, but she needs reminders
        and someone to accompany her. She does not know how long she
USCA11 Case: 22-13053         Document: 29-1         Date Filed: 09/07/2023         Page: 10 of 21

        10                         Opinion of the Court                        22-13053

        can pay attention and struggles with following instructions.
        Cabrera noted that she does not care about her life, does not want
        to eat or do anything, cuts herself to externalize her internal pain,
        and sometimes gets aggressive.
               In August 2020, Cabrera provided testimony at her ALJ hear-
        ing. Cabrera could not recall the last time she entered a grocery
        store or left her house, and stated she does not go anywhere. She
        has negative thoughts, hears voices, and is always tired. Cabrera is
        driven by her roommate or by a rideshare driver to get to her doc-
        tor’s appointments. She relies on her roommate to pick up medi-
        cation and purchase frozen meals. She can sleep when taking her
        medication. Cabrera struggles with dizziness, aggressiveness, for-
        getfulness, and she has at least three panic attacks a week.
                                        C. Agency Proceedings
               In 2017, Cabrera applied for DIB and SSI, alleging an onset
        date of May 7, 2015 for the following disabilities: depression, anxi-
        ety, and mental disability. Disability examiners denied Cabrera’s
        application initially and on reconsideration. Cabrera then re-
        quested and received an administrative hearing before an ALJ.
               The ALJ must follow ﬁve steps when evaluating a claim for
        disability. 4 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a), 416.920(a). First, if a claimant
        is engaged in substantial gainful activity, she is not disabled. Id.

        4 If the ALJ determines that the claimant is or is not disabled at any step of the
        sequential analysis, the analysis ends.           20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4),
        416.920(a)(4).
USCA11 Case: 22-13053       Document: 29-1        Date Filed: 09/07/2023       Page: 11 of 21

        22-13053                 Opinion of the Court                            11

        §§ 404.1520(b), 416.920(b). Second, if a claimant does not have an
        impairment or combination of impairments that signiﬁcantly lim-
        its her physical or mental ability to perform basic work activities,
        she does not have a severe impairment and is not disabled. Id. §
        404.1520(c), 416.920(c); see also McDaniel v. Bowen, 800 F.2d 1026,
        1031 (11th Cir. 1986) (describing Step Two as a threshold inquiry,
        allowing “only claims based on the most trivial impairments to be
        rejected”). Third, if a claimant’s impairments meet or equal an im-
        pairment listed in a provided appendix (the “Listings”), she is disa-
        bled. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(d), 416.920(d); 20 C.F.R. pt. 404, subpt.
        P, app. 1. Fourth, if a claimant’s impairments do not meet or equal
        an impairment in the Listings, the ALJ must assess the claimant’s
        Residual Functional Capacity (RFC). 5 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(e),
        416.920(e). Fifth, using the claimant’s RFC, the ALJ will determine
        whether the claimant can still perform past relevant work. Id.
        §§ 404.1520(f ), 416.920(f ). If the claimant can do this type of work,
        she is not disabled. Id. If a claimant’s impairments (considering
        her RFC, age, education, and past work) do not prevent her from
        performing other work that exists in the national economy, she is
        not disabled. Id. §§ 404.1520(g), 416.920(g).
               The ALJ issued a decision in September 2020. At step one,
        the ALJ determined that Cabrera had not engaged in substantial
        gainful activity since her alleged onset date.

        5 A claimant’s RFC is the level of physical and mental work she can consist-
        ently perform despite her limitations. Id. §§ 404.1545(a), 416.945(a).
USCA11 Case: 22-13053       Document: 29-1        Date Filed: 09/07/2023        Page: 12 of 21

        12                       Opinion of the Court                     22-13053

              At step two, the ALJ found Cabrera possesses the following
        severe impairments: anxiety disorder, panic disorder without ago-
        raphobia, bipolar disorder, and borderline personality disorder.
              At step three, the ALJ found that despite Cabrera’s severe
        impairments, she did not have an impairment or combination of
        impairments that met or medically equal the severity of an impair-
        ment listed in applicable regulations.
              At step four, after considering the record and medical evi-
        dence, the ALJ found that Cabrera had the RFC to perform me-
        dium work 6 with the following caveats:
               Cabrera can lift and carry ﬁfty pounds occasionally
               and up to twenty-ﬁve pounds frequently; sit, stand, or
               walk for six hours in an eight-hour workday; occa-
               sionally work at unprotected heights or around mov-
               ing mechanical parts; mentally perform simple, rou-
               tine, and repetitive tasks, but not at production rate
               pace; make simple work-related decisions; occasion-
               ally interact with supervisors, coworkers, and the
               public; and could never climb ladders, ropes, or scaf-
               folds.

              Based on these findings, the ALJ determined that Cabrera
        could not perform her past work as a cashier checker. The ALJ

        6 “Medium work involves lifting no more than fifty pounds at a time with
        frequent lifting or carrying of objects weighing up to twenty-five pounds. If
        someone can do medium work, [the SSA can] determine that he or she can
        also do sedentary and light work.” Id. §§ 404.1567(c), 416.967(c).
USCA11 Case: 22-13053     Document: 29-1      Date Filed: 09/07/2023    Page: 13 of 21

        22-13053               Opinion of the Court                       13

        then determined that Cabrera can perform jobs existing in signifi-
        cant numbers in the national economy, specifically representative
        occupations such as laundry worker, floor worker, and general la-
        borer. As a result, the ALJ found Cabrera not disabled.
                To create the RFC, the ALJ considered the opinions of
        Cabrera’s physicians. Relevant to this appeal, the ALJ assigned
        some weight to parts of Dr. Ruiz’s opinions but little or no weight
        to Dr. Ruiz’s conclusions that Cabrera: had marked limitations in
        ability for social functioning and ability to concentrate; would ex-
        perience four or more episodes of decompensation within a 12-
        month period for at least two weeks duration; and likely be absent
        from work more than four days per month. The ALJ concluded
        that Dr. Ruiz gave extreme limitations and the objective medical
        records conflicted with his opinions.
               Cabrera then requested the Appeals Council review the
        ALJ’s decision. The Appeals Council denied Cabrera’s request for
        review, making the ALJ’s decision the final decision of the Com-
        missioner. Cabrera appealed to the district court, which affirmed
        the ALJ’s denial of Cabrera’s DIB and SSI. Cabrera timely appealed.
                             II. Standards of Review
               When “an ALJ denies beneﬁts and the Appeals Council de-
        nies review, we review the ALJ’s decision as the Commissioner’s
        ﬁnal decision.” Viverette v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 13 F.4th 1309, 1313
        (11th Cir. 2021) (alteration adopted). We review a social security
        disability case to determine whether the Commissioner’s decision
        is supported by substantial evidence and review de novo whether
USCA11 Case: 22-13053      Document: 29-1      Date Filed: 09/07/2023     Page: 14 of 21

        14                     Opinion of the Court                  22-13053

        the ALJ applied the correct legal standards. Id. at 1313–14. “Our
        review is ‘the same as that of the district court,’ meaning we nei-
        ther defer to nor consider any errors in the district court’s opinion.”
        Henry v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 802 F.3d 1264, 1267 (11th Cir. 2015) (per
        curiam) (internal citations omitted) (quoting Doughty v. Apfel, 245
        F.3d 1274, 1278 (11th Cir. 2001).
                Substantial evidence is relevant evidence, less than a prepon-
        derance but greater than a scintilla, that “a reasonable person
        would accept as adequate to support a conclusion.” Viverette, 13
        F.4th at 1314. We “may not decide the facts anew, reweigh the evi-
        dence, or substitute our judgment for that of the ALJ.” Id. (altera-
        tion adopted). But a decision is not based on substantial evidence
        if it focuses on one aspect of the evidence while disregarding con-
        trary evidence. McCruter v. Bowen, 791 F.2d 1544, 1548 (11th Cir.
        1986).
                                  III. Discussion
               Cabrera contends that the ALJ erred when assessing Dr.
        Ruiz’s opinions. Because she protectively filed her claims before
        March 27, 2017, her claims are governed under the treating physi-
        cian rule, meaning the ALJ could only discount Dr. Ruiz’s opinions
        for good cause, which Cabrera argues the ALJ failed to do. 20
        C.F.R. § 404.1527. She argues that the ALJ selectively used gener-
        alized statements that showed she was cooperative, coherent, and
        had good thought processes, and ignored other parts of the record
        that showed she was depressed, anxious, and significantly limited
        in social interactions.
USCA11 Case: 22-13053     Document: 29-1      Date Filed: 09/07/2023    Page: 15 of 21

        22-13053               Opinion of the Court                       15

                To determine whether a claimant is disabled, the ALJ con-
        siders medical opinions from acceptable medical sources, including
        licensed physicians and psychologists.                20 C.F.R.
        §§ 404.1502(a)(1)-(2), 416.902(a)(1)-(2). For claims filed before
        March 27, 2017, these medical opinions should reflect judgments
        about the nature and severity of the claimant’s impairments, in-
        cluding symptoms, diagnoses, prognoses, and physical or mental
        restrictions. Id. §§ 404.1527(a)(1), 416.927(a)(1).
               “[T]he ALJ must state with particularity the weight given to
        different medical opinions and the reasons therefor.” Winschel v.
        Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 631 F.3d 1176, 1179 (11th Cir. 2011). Thus, this
        Court will not affirm merely because some rationale supports the
        ALJ’s conclusion if “the ALJ fails to state with at least some meas-
        ure of clarity the grounds for his decision.” Id. (quotation marks
        omitted).
               A “treating source” is a physician or other medical source
        who has provided the claimant with medical treatment and has, or
        previously had, an ongoing treatment relationship with the claim-
        ant. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1527(a)(2), 416.927(a)(2). The ALJ must give
        a treating physician’s opinion “substantial or considerable weight
        unless there is good cause to discount [it].” Simon v. Comm’r, Soc.
        Sec. Admin., 7 F.4th 1094, 1104 (11th Cir. 2021) (quotation marks
        omitted) (superseded by regulation after March 27, 2017, when the
        treating physician rule stopped applying). Good cause to give a
        treating physician’s opinion less than substantial or considerable
        weight exists when: (1) the evidence does not bolster the treating
USCA11 Case: 22-13053     Document: 29-1      Date Filed: 09/07/2023    Page: 16 of 21

        16                     Opinion of the Court                22-13053

        physician’s opinion; (2) the evidence supports a contrary finding;
        or (3) the treating physician’s opinion is conclusory or inconsistent
        with his own medical records. Id. When good cause exists, the ALJ
        may reject a treating physician’s opinion, but he “must clearly ar-
        ticulate the reasons for doing so.” Id. (quotation marks omitted
        and alteration adopted).
               When the ALJ decides that a treating physician’s opinion
        does not warrant controlling weight, he then must decide what
        weight to give the opinion based on several factors, including:
        (1) the length of treatment and frequency of evaluation; (2) the na-
        ture and extent of the treatment relationship; (3) the medical evi-
        dence supporting the opinions; (4) consistency with the record as a
        whole; (5) specialization in the medical area at issue; and (6) any
        other factors tending to support or contradict the opinion.
        20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1527(c)(2)-(6), 416.927(c)(2)-(6).
               Cabrera’s central argument focuses on the ALJ’s selection of
        generalized statements showing normal findings about her condi-
        tion without considering all the evidence that showed she had ex-
        tensive mental illness that impacted her life and ability to work.
        Despite the deferential standard as to the ALJ’s decision, we find
        that Cabrera’s medical records were consistent with Dr. Ruiz’s
        opinions and the ALJ erroneously discounted Dr. Ruiz’s opinions.
        The ALJ chose generalized findings to contradict Dr. Ruiz’s opin-
        ions and to support the ALJ’s finding that Cabrera is not disabled.
        As we discussed in Simon, generalized findings cannot be used to
USCA11 Case: 22-13053      Document: 29-1      Date Filed: 09/07/2023     Page: 17 of 21

        22-13053               Opinion of the Court                         17

        create inconsistences that justify discounting a treating physician’s
        opinion.
                In Simon, we concluded that an ALJ misunderstands mental
        illness when relying on “a snapshot of any single moment[, which]
        says little about a person’s overall condition” when the person is
        suﬀering from bipolar disorder. 7 F.4th at 1106 (alteration
        adopted). An ALJ who relies on generalized statements from a
        medical document saying a claimant is “stable on medication” to
        show inconsistency with the record does not consider the nature
        of bipolar disorder, which is characterized by a ﬂuctuation of
        symptoms. Id. A “good day” or “good months” do not mean that
        the core condition has been treated. Id.
               Additionally in Simon, the ALJ discounted Simon’s treating
        physician’s opinions because of inconsistency with clinical findings,
        specifically regarding Simon’s capabilities of having fair insight,
        good judgment, and other attributes. Id. at 1109. We stated that
        capabilities such as these “say little to nothing about the capacity to
        work of a person suffering from the types of mental illnesses with
        which Simon was diagnosed.” Id. We explained that “highly gen-
        eralized statements that a claimant was ‘cooperative’ during exam-
        ination, . . . or that he showed ‘fair insight’ and ‘intact cognition,’
        ordinarily will not be an adequate basis to reject a treating physi-
        cian’s opinion.” Id. at 1107. An ALJ must account for the differ-
        ences between a home or clinic setting and a more stressful work
        setting, concluding that a claimant’s ability to eat, put on clothes,
        and purchase necessities does not “say much about whether a
USCA11 Case: 22-13053      Document: 29-1      Date Filed: 09/07/2023     Page: 18 of 21

        18                     Opinion of the Court                  22-13053

        person can function in a work environment.” Id. at 1108. An ALJ
        must identify a genuine inconsistency with other medical findings
        in the record in order to reject a treating physician’s opinions. Id.
        at 1107.
                Here, the ALJ improperly discounted Dr. Ruiz’s opinions in
        favor of using other treatment records that showed Cabrera was
        cooperative and oriented to all spheres. The ALJ erroneously used
        general statements about Cabrera’s cooperation and orientation to
        discount Dr. Ruiz’s opinions, referring to Cabrera’s appearance
        (i.e., her ability to dress herself appropriately), her ability to make
        good eye contact, and her stability while on medication. But
        Cabrera’s functioning reports show that she needs reminders to
        shower and groom herself. Her ability to be dressed appropriately
        once a month to see the doctor in the oﬃce or at her home does
        not reﬂect the severe limitations her medical conditions have in her
        everyday life.
               Dr. Ruiz treated Cabrera from March 2017 through at least
        May 2020. Although Dr. Ruiz at times noted Cabrera was stabilized
        on medication, had adequate concentration, adequate judgment,
        and was sleeping, he noted at other times that Cabrera had poor
        concentration, diminished judgment, and diﬃculties sleeping. As
        discussed above, Dr. Ruiz consistently found Cabrera to be anxious
        and depressed and noted frequently that Cabrera had racing
        thoughts, compulsive behavior, and extensive mood swings. As we
        noted in Simon, bipolar disorder is explicitly characterized by a ﬂuc-
        tuation in a patient’s symptoms, and a good day does not imply that
USCA11 Case: 22-13053     Document: 29-1      Date Filed: 09/07/2023     Page: 19 of 21

        22-13053               Opinion of the Court                        19

        the fundamental condition has been treated. 7 F.4th at 1106.
        Cabrera’s Adult Functioning Reports and testimony reﬂect her
        daily limitations, which are consistent with Dr. Ruiz’s appointment
        notes.
               Dr. Ruiz’s assessments from June 2018, September 2018, and
        August 2019 are consistent with each other and show that Cabrera
        would have signiﬁcant limitations and hindrances in a work envi-
        ronment. Also, by Cabrera’s own admission, the only time she
        leaves her house is to attend doctor’s appointments. By discount-
        ing Dr. Ruiz’s opinions, the ALJ appears to have discounted the per-
        son who likely has the most insight into Cabrera’s day-to-day life.
               While the ALJ states that contemporary treatment records
        are inconsistent with Dr. Ruiz’s opinions, the most recent treat-
        ment records reﬂect that Cabrera’s conditions are getting worse.
        At Cabrera’s June 2020 appointment, Dr. Charneco noted that
        Cabrera had increased anxiety, mood swings, and continued diﬃ-
        culty being around other people. Cabrera herself reported that she
        felt worse. Dr. Charneco is the only other doctor who consistently
        saw Cabrera for the same amount time as Dr. Ruiz. Dr. Charneco
        had similar ﬁndings to Dr. Ruiz. As we noted in Simon, the ALJ
        must ﬁnd a genuine inconsistency with other medical ﬁndings be-
        fore rejecting a treating physician’s opinions as inconsistent. Id. at
        1107. In discounting Dr. Ruiz’s opinions as inconsistent with con-
        temporary treatment records, the ALJ also disregarded Dr. Char-
        neco’s ﬁndings.
USCA11 Case: 22-13053     Document: 29-1     Date Filed: 09/07/2023    Page: 20 of 21

        20                    Opinion of the Court                 22-13053

               Further, the ALJ stated that Cabrera’s cycling injury shows
        inconsistency with Dr. Ruiz’s opinions. Cabrera conceded during
        the second hearing that she regularly cycled with others prior to
        the alleged onset date in 2015. But from 2015 onward, the only
        mention in the record of Cabrera cycling in a group was when she
        went to the hospital for an injury in August 2019. Cabrera consist-
        ently testiﬁed that she did not have any friends and rarely left her
        home. The ALJ’s reliance on this hospital record is a clear example
        of the ALJ relying on a “snapshot of [a] single moment” from the
        record, which as we stated in Simon, is not enough to discount a
        treating physician’s opinion. Id. at 1106.
               Moreover, the ALJ relied on Cabrera’s attendance at her
        medical appointments to ﬁnd that Cabrera never missed a sched-
        uled appointment. Yet the record does not reveal the full history,
        such as any rescheduled or missed appointments. The record only
        includes notes from the attended appointments themselves. The
        record shows that Cabrera was driven to appointments and for a
        period of time, the appointments took place in Cabrera’s home.
        The ALJ improperly used Cabrera’s ability to attend appointments
        as indicative of her ability to regularly work. We remarked in Simon
        that an ALJ must account for the diﬀerences between a treatment
        or home environment and a daily work environment, which the
        ALJ here did does not do. Id. at 1107.
              If the ALJ seeks to discount Dr. Ruiz’s opinions, the ALJ
        must ﬁnd a genuine inconsistency elsewhere in the record. The
        ALJ must review the record with consideration to the realities of
USCA11 Case: 22-13053    Document: 29-1     Date Filed: 09/07/2023   Page: 21 of 21

        22-13053              Opinion of the Court                     21

        how bipolar disorder manifests in patients. The ALJ must rely on
        the full range of evidence from Cabrera’s doctors over this time
        period, rather than cherry picking records from single days or
        treatments to support a conclusion. Based on our careful review
        of the record, the medical treatment notes and Cabrera’s own dis-
        closures are consistent with Dr. Ruiz’s opinions.
                                IV. Conclusion
               Accordingly, we reverse and remand to the district court
        with instructions to vacate the Commissioner’s decision and to re-
        mand to the Commissioner for further proceedings consistent with
        this opinion.
              REVERSED and REMANDED WITH INSTRUCTIONS.