Andrew Higgins v. Nancy Berryhill
693 F. App'x 602
| 9th Cir. | 2017Background
- Andrew Higgins applied for Social Security disability insurance benefits and SSI; ALJ denied benefits and Commissioner’s decision was appealed.
- District court reversed and remanded, directing the ALJ to consider Dr. Bowes’s medical opinion and, if necessary, to reassess Higgins’s impairments, RFC, and ability to perform work in the national economy.
- On remand issues, Higgins argued the ALJ committed additional legal errors before reconsideration.
- The Ninth Circuit reviewed de novo and affirmed the district court’s remand order while addressing other ALJ findings.
- The ALJ had given less weight to treating and examining source opinions (e.g., Dr. Heilbrunn) for inconsistency with the record and Higgins’s activities, and discounted Higgins’s symptom testimony for multiple clear-and-convincing reasons.
- The court held the ALJ erred by not considering Dr. Bowes’s opinion but found crediting the evidence as true inappropriate because unresolved issues remained; remand (not immediate award) was appropriate.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Weight given to Dr. Heilbrunn’s opinion | ALJ erred in discounting the opinion | ALJ permissibly gave less weight due to inconsistency with record and activities | Affirmed: ALJ provided specific and legitimate reasons to give less than full weight |
| Credibility of Higgins’s symptom testimony | ALJ improperly rejected Higgins’s subjective testimony | ALJ properly discounted testimony for exaggeration, conservative treatment, objective inconsistency, and activities | Affirmed: ALJ gave clear and convincing, supported reasons to discount testimony |
| Lay witness (Miranda Higgins) testimony | ALJ erroneously rejected lay testimony | ALJ lawfully rejected it as inconsistent with medical record and reported activities | Affirmed: ALJ gave germane reasons; any other errors harmless |
| Failure to consider Dr. Bowes’s opinion | ALJ failed to consider and should have credited Dr. Bowes, requiring benefits | Commissioner conceded remand to consider Dr. Bowes’s opinion; other record supports ALJ’s mental-impairment findings | Remand ordered to consider Dr. Bowes; error acknowledged but not grounds for immediate crediting because outstanding issues remain |
Key Cases Cited
- Ghanim v. Colvin, 763 F.3d 1154 (9th Cir.) (standard of de novo review for appeals from district court reviewing Social Security decisions)
- Lester v. Chater, 81 F.3d 821 (9th Cir.) (standards for evaluating physician opinions)
- Morgan v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec. Admin., 169 F.3d 595 (9th Cir.) (assessing inconsistencies between physician opinions and medical record)
- Rollins v. Massanari, 261 F.3d 853 (9th Cir.) (use of claimant activities to evaluate credibility)
- Molina v. Astrue, 674 F.3d 1104 (9th Cir.) (harmless error framework in Social Security cases)
- Burrell v. Colvin, 775 F.3d 1133 (9th Cir.) (clear-and-convincing reasons required to reject claimant testimony)
- Tonapetyan v. Halter, 242 F.3d 1144 (9th Cir.) (objective medical evidence and symptom exaggeration in credibility findings)
- Parra v. Astrue, 481 F.3d 742 (9th Cir.) (conservative treatment as a basis to discount symptom testimony)
- Bayliss v. Barnhart, 427 F.3d 1211 (9th Cir.) (requirements for evaluating lay witness testimony and RFC support)
- Batson v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec. Admin., 359 F.3d 1190 (9th Cir.) (ALJ’s duty in resolving ambiguities in medical evidence)
- Treichler v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec. Admin., 775 F.3d 1090 (9th Cir.) (when credit-as-true is inappropriate and remand is required)