Calkins v. Commissioner, Social Security Administration, 3:13-cv-02323

Plaintiff Ronna Calkins applied for Supplemental Security Income (SSI) on June 3, 2010, alleging longstanding physical and cognitive impairments; application denied administratively and after an ALJ hearing.
ALJ found no substantial gainful activity, identified several severe impairments (mild cervical lordosis, mild lumbar degenerative disc disease, enchondroma of humerus with mild tendinopathy, mild bursitis, and a learning disorder), and found no listings met or equaled.
ALJ assessed RFC: light work with limits to simple, routine, repetitive tasks; no right-arm overhead lifting; only occasional public interaction. Plaintiff had no past relevant work.
Using vocational testimony, ALJ concluded Plaintiff could perform jobs existing in significant numbers (product sorter, small products assembly, laundry folder), and therefore was not disabled.
Plaintiff appealed, arguing the ALJ improperly (1) rejected an examining psychologist’s opinion, (2) failed to consider a treating mental-health counselor’s letter, (3) overlooked obesity, and (4) that the Appeals Council erred by not considering new evidence. Magistrate Judge Clarke recommended affirmance.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether ALJ improperly rejected examining psychologist's opinion	Psychologist’s opinion should have been credited; ALJ erred in discounting it	Opinion was contradicted; ALJ gave specific, legitimate reasons (reliance on claimant’s disputed subjective reports; examiner himself described results as inconclusive; report in record unsigned at time)	ALJ permissibly discounted the opinion; decision upheld
Whether ALJ failed to consider counselor's letter	ALJ omitted consideration of treating counselor’s letter, requiring remand	Omission was harmless because the letter largely summarized existing records that the ALJ evaluated and discounted	Error was harmless; no prejudice shown
Whether ALJ failed to consider obesity	ALJ did not list obesity as a severe impairment and failed to account for it in analysis	No evidence in the record that obesity caused functional limitations or impacted listings or RFC	No reversible error; plaintiff failed to show obesity prejudice
Whether Appeals Council erred by not considering new evidence	Appeals Council declined to consider post-decision medical report and erred	Court lacks jurisdiction to review Appeals Council’s denial because it is a non-final agency action	Court lacks jurisdiction to review Appeals Council’s decision; claim not before the court

Pitzer v. Sullivan, 908 F.2d 502 (9th Cir. 1990) (ALJ must give clear and convincing reasons to reject an uncontradicted examining physician opinion)
Lester v. Chater, 81 F.3d 821 (9th Cir. 1995) (ALJ must provide specific, legitimate reasons to reject a contradicted examining opinion)
Fair v. Bowen, 885 F.2d 597 (9th Cir. 1989) (ALJ may reject physician opinions premised on properly discounted subjective complaints)
Molina v. Astrue, 674 F.3d 1104 (9th Cir. 2012) (harmless-error standard for ALJ’s omission of evidence/testimony)
Stout v. Commissioner Soc. Sec. Admin., 454 F.3d 1050 (9th Cir. 2006) (lay or counselor testimony requires consideration where it identifies limitations not otherwise addressed)
Burch v. Barnhart, 400 F.3d 676 (9th Cir. 2005) (discussing prejudice analysis when ALJ omits an impairment like obesity)
Brewes v. Commissioner of Soc. Sec. Admin., 682 F.3d 1157 (9th Cir. 2012) (court lacks jurisdiction to review Appeals Council denial of review)
Keyser v. Commissioner Soc. Sec. Admin., 648 F.3d 721 (9th Cir. 2011) (summary of the five-step sequential disability evaluation)