Bottom v. Commissioner, Social Security Administration
6:13-cv-01106
D. Or.Jul 30, 2014Background
- Gina A. Bottom sought DIB after alleged onset of Oct 15, 2007; born May 1965 with an 8th-grade education.
- Plaintiff endured significant childhood trauma including neglect and abuse and underwent painful medical procedures.
- Prior work as cleaner, tagger, and fast-food worker; ceased substantial gainful activity prior to insured date.
- August 12, 2009 application filed; initial denial and reconsideration; hearing held Sept. 22, 2011 before ALJ.
- ALJ found Plaintiff not disabled; Appeals Council denied review; SSA final decision reversed and remanded.
- ALJ determined RFC for simple, routine work with limited public and coworker interaction; found past work and several SVPs feasible.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Credibility of Plaintiff's testimony | Bottom's testimony credible and consistent with record evidence. | ALJ properly found credibility lacking due to inconsistencies in daily activities and other factors. | Remand required; credibility details insufficiently supported with clear and convincing reasons. |
| Weight given to treating nurse practitioner Amittay | Amittay's opinion should be given substantial weight as treating source. | Amittay is an 'other source'; ALJ can discount with germane reasons. | Reversal; ALJ improperly discounted Amittay's opinion for post-insurance onset timing and inconsistency with notes. |
| Treatment of examining clinicians Farivar and Belcher | Their opinions should be given controlling or substantial weight based on examination. | Their opinions were contradicted by other evidence; ALJ provided reasons to discount. | Remand; ALJ failed to provide clear and convincing or specific legitimate reasons; need proper crediting/discounting. |
| RFC and past relevant work determination | RFC did not incorporate clinicians' opinions; past work finding could be erroneous. | RFC supported by record; vocational evidence adequate. | Remand; Vocational expert instruction and RFC integration require further proceedings. |
Key Cases Cited
- Tommasetti v. Astrue, 533 F.3d 1035 (9th Cir. 2008) (creditability must be supported by substantial evidence; specific inconsistencies needed)
- Regennitter v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec. Admin., 166 F.3d 1294 (9th Cir. 1999) (requires substantial evidence for credibility findings; cannot rely on isolated facts)
- Tackett v. Apfel, 180 F.3d 1094 (9th Cir. 1999) (when evidence is susceptible to multiple interpretations, court defers to ALJ's rational reading)
- Stout v. Comm'r, Soc. Sec. Admin., 454 F.3d 1050 (9th Cir. 2006) (crediting evidence and weighing medical opinions is within court's discretion)