Court Opinion

ID: 9839837
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-14 15:01:32.742971+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:41:37.801627
License: Public Domain

United States Court of Appeals
                             For the Eighth Circuit
                         ___________________________

                                 No. 23-1808
                         ___________________________

                                     Steve Nicoski

                         lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant

                                            v.

     Kilolo Kijakazi, Acting Commissioner of Social Security Administration

                        lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellee
                                       ____________

                     Appeal from United States District Court
                          for the District of Minnesota
                                  ____________

                            Submitted: August 31, 2023
                             Filed: September 14, 2023
                                   [Unpublished]
                                   ____________

Before SHEPHERD, GRASZ, and KOBES, Circuit Judges.
                           ____________

PER CURIAM.

       Steve Nicoski appeals the district court’s1 order affirming the denial of
disability insurance benefits. We agree with the court that substantial evidence in the

      1
        The Honorable Dulce J. Foster, United States Magistrate Judge for the District
of Minnesota, to whom the case was referred for final disposition by consent of the
parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c).
record as a whole supports the adverse decision. See Swarthout v. Kijakazi, 35 F.4th
608, 610 (8th Cir. 2022) (standard of review).

       Specifically, we find that the administrative law judge (ALJ) properly
considered Nicoski’s subjective complaints, including those regarding his chronic
pain syndrome and chronic fatigue syndrome. See id. at 612 (claimant’s daily
activities suggested she was not as limited as alleged); Pierce v. Kijakazi, 22 F.4th
769, 773 (8th Cir. 2022) (ALJ properly considered claimant’s treatment history and
sporadic work record in discounting his testimony). We also find that substantial
evidence supports the ALJ’s determination of Nicoski’s residual functional capacity
(RFC). See Despain v. Berryhill, 926 F.3d 1024, 1028-29 (8th Cir. 2019) (substantial
evidence supported RFC finding based on providers’ notes, medical consultants’
opinions, and claimant’s treatment). Finally, we find no abuse of discretion in
declining to remand the case for consideration of the new evidence Nicoski submitted
to the district court, as that evidence was not new and material, or Nicoski did not
provide good cause for failing to submit it to the ALJ. See 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) (court
may order new evidence taken before Commissioner only upon showing that there is
new and material evidence, and that there is good cause for failure to incorporate such
evidence into record in prior proceeding); Whitman v. Colvin, 762 F.3d 701, 710 (8th
Cir. 2014) (no abuse of discretion in declining to remand based on new evidence;
even assuming that evidence was material, non-cumulative, and related to period at
issue, claimant failed to show good cause for not providing it before ALJ hearing).

      The judgment is affirmed.
                     ______________________________

                                         -2-