Agustin Mendez Delao v. Carolyn W. Colvin, 5:16-cv-02232

Plaintiff Agustin Mendez Delao applied for DIB and SSI alleging disability beginning April 16, 2010; applications were denied and an ALJ denied benefits after a March 4, 2015 hearing; Appeals Council denied review and Plaintiff sued.
ALJ found severe impairments: cervical and lumbosacral discogenic disease, status post bilateral shoulder surgeries, right and left wrist overuse syndromes (with ligament tear on left).
ALJ concluded Plaintiff did not meet a Listing and assessed an RFC for medium work with limits: lift/carry 50 lbs occasionally/25 lbs frequently, stand/walk 6 of 8 hours, sit 6 of 8 hours, frequent posturals, occasional ladders/scaffolds, frequent uneven terrain, occasional overhead work, very limited English.
ALJ discounted Plaintiff’s symptom testimony as not fully credible based on: (1) reported work after alleged onset, (2) objective medical findings that did not support disabling limitations, and (3) conservative treatment and refusal of interventional options; one reason (daily activities) was found not clearly convincing by the court but error was harmless.
ALJ gave significant/great weight to treating/consultative opinions (Drs. Bernabe, Moazzaz, state consultants) finding no hand use or fine manipulation limitations; relied on VE testimony that jobs existed at step five; district court affirmed Commissioner.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether ALJ properly assessed RFC w.r.t. wrist impairments	RFC omitted handling/grip limits needed for severe wrist conditions	RFC reflects medical evidence and opinions showing preserved hand function	ALJ did not err; RFC supported by substantial evidence
Whether ALJ posed a complete hypothetical to the VE	Hypothetical omitted wrist/handling limits so VE testimony unreliable	Hypothetical mirrored RFC and included all credible limitations	Hypothetical was proper and supported by record
Whether ALJ properly assessed claimant’s credibility	ALJ failed to give clear and convincing reasons to reject testimony	ALJ provided multiple valid reasons (inconsistency, objective findings, conservative treatment)	Court found credibility discounting legally valid despite one infirm reason
Whether ALJ should have credited workers’ compensation disability findings	WC records found temporary total disability; Plaintiff urges reliance	WC findings are not controlling for Social Security and were properly discounted	ALJ correctly gave those WC conclusions little weight

Lester v. Chater, 81 F.3d 821 (9th Cir. 1996) (treating physician rule and weighing medical opinions)
Lingenfelter v. Astrue, 504 F.3d 1028 (9th Cir. 2007) (definition of substantial evidence and ALJ’s duty to synthesize evidence)
Molina v. Astrue, 674 F.3d 1104 (9th Cir. 2012) (two-step credibility analysis for subjective symptom testimony)
Treichler v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec. Admin., 775 F.3d 1090 (9th Cir. 2014) (objective evidence threshold in credibility evaluation)
Morgan v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec. Admin., 169 F.3d 595 (9th Cir. 1999) (daily activities may undermine credibility if transferable to work)