Court Opinion

ID: 2964071
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-21 21:20:00.829337+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:42:49.973074
License: Public Domain

USCA1 Opinion

	

          April 23, 1996
                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT

                                 ____________________

        No. 95-1791

                               ADRIAN GARCIA-MARTINEZ,

                                Plaintiff, Appellant,

                                          v.

                           COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,

                                 Defendant, Appellee.

                                 ____________________

                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

                           FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO

                    [Hon. Jaime Pieras, Jr., U.S. District Judge]
                                             ___________________

                                 ____________________

                                        Before

                                Torruella, Chief Judge,
                                           ___________
                          Boudin and Stahl, Circuit Judges.
                                            ______________

                                 ____________________

            Raymond Rivera Esteves and Juan A.  Hernandez Rivera on brief  for
            ______________________     _________________________
        appellant.
            Guillermo  Gil,  United States  Attorney,  Maria  Hortensia  Rios-
            ______________                             _______________________
        Gandara,  Assistant  United  States  Attorney,  and  Wayne  G.  Lewis,
        _______                                              ________________
        Assistant Regional Counsel, Region  I, Social Security Administration,
        on brief for appellee.

                                 ____________________

                                 ____________________

                      Per  Curiam.     Claimant  Adrian   Garcia-Martinez
                      ___________

            appeals  from  the  district  court  judgment  affirming  the

            decision of the  Secretary of Health and  Human Services that

            claimant  is  not  entitled  to  Social  Security  disability

            benefits.  Claimant raises four arguments on appeal:  (1) the

            administrative  law  judge  (ALJ)  did not  comply  with  the

            Appeals  Council's  remand  order  to  obtain  more  evidence

            concerning the existence of a mental impairment;  (2) the ALJ

            erred  in not  crediting the  opinion of  claimant's treating

            physician  that claimant  was  completely disabled;  (3)  the

            ALJ's finding that  claimant could return to his  past medium

            work was  unsupported by the  record; and (4)  the vocational

            expert  (VE) failed  to  take  into consideration  claimant's

            limitations  on his  range  of motion.    We agree  with  the

            district court's decision, adding the  following points keyed

            to claimant's arguments on appeal.

                      1.   The  ALJ obtained  the services  of a  medical

            advisor, a  psychiatrist and  neurologist,  who reviewed  the

            entire  record  and observed  claimant  at the  hearing.   He

            opined  that claimant did not have a mental impairment.  This

            conclusion particularly was  supported by claimant's response

            to  the  question  why  he  had  stopped  working.    On  two

            occasions,  claimant  answered  that  his  physical  problems

            prevented him from continuing with his employment.   He never

            referred to  any emotional symptoms, much  less described how

                                         -2-

            his mental condition affected his ability  to engage in work-

            related  activities.  See Santiago v. Secretary of Health and
                                  ___ ________    _______________________

            Human  Services, 944 F.2d 1, 5-7 (1st Cir. 1991) (per curiam)
            _______________

            (where the testimony and  the evidence did not go  far enough

            to raise  a "meaningful  issue" in  regard to  how claimant's

            impairments affected her ability to work, the ALJ had no duty

            to  further   develop  the   record  by   obtaining  residual

            functional capacity assessments).

                      2.  The ALJ  did not err in not  giving controlling

            weight to  the opinion of claimant's  treating physician, Dr.

            Martinez, that  claimant was completely disabled.   Given the

            conflicting evidence, the  ALJ was not required  to accede to

            the  treating physician's  opinion rather  than the  contrary

            evidence  of  the  medical  advisor  and  to  other  evidence

            supporting  the latter's  position.   See Rodriguez  Pagan v.
                                                  ___ ________________

            Secretary  of Health and Human  Services, 819 F.2d  1, 3 (1st
            ________________________________________

            Cir. 1987) (per curiam), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 1012 (1988).
                                     ____________

                      3.  The uncontradicted residual functional capacity

            assessment  of  the  medical advisor  restricted  claimant to

            lifting 30 pounds;  medium work involves the ability  to lift

            50  pounds.   See  20 C.F.R.     404.1567(c).   Consequently,
                          ___

            claimant  cannot  perform  the  full range  of  medium  work.
                                            ____

            However, the vocational expert  not only opined that claimant

            could perform  his past, medium  work as a  groundskeeper, he

            also  listed light jobs that  would be available to claimant.

                                         -3-

            Given that claimant can do some medium work, he  is deemed to

            be able  to perform  light work.   Id.   Thus, the  Secretary
                                               ___

            satisfied her burden, at step five of the sequential process,

            to  show that  there was other  work claimant  could perform.

            Id.   404.1520(f).
            ___

                      4.    There  was  conflicting  evidence  concerning

            claimant's range of motion (for example, Dr. Stella-Arrillaga

            found  no  limitations).   Thus, there  is  no basis  for the
                   __

            claimant's  assertion  that  the  vocational  expert and  ALJ

            disregarded  established limitations  on claimant's  range of

            motion.  The  ALJ's decision  must stand.   See Rodriguez  v.
                                                        ___ _________

            Secretary of  Health and  Human Services,  647 F.2d  218, 222
            ________________________________________

            (1st  Cir. 1981)  (conflicts  in  the  evidence are  for  the

            Secretary to resolve).

                      Affirmed.
                      ________

                                         -4-