Charles Dixon v. Carolyn W. Colvin, 2:16-cv-05844

Plaintiff (b. 1969) applied for DIB and SSI alleging disability from Nov 28, 2007, due to back pain, gout, prior gunshot wounds, and hand/femur injuries; prior 2011 application was denied.
After surgeries (left femur intramedullary nailing in Dec 2011; excisional biopsy of right-hand mass in Aug 2012) and ongoing treatment (colchicine, Uloric, oxycodone, and repeated joint injections), he continued to report recurrent gout flares, wrist/hand weakness, and lumbar pain.
ALJ found severe impairments of back disorder and gout, assessed an RFC for light work with limitations (stand/walk/sit 6/8 hours, occasional posturals, frequent handling/fingering but no forceful gripping), and concluded claimant could perform other work; ALJ denied benefits.
Appeals Council added later 2014 treatment notes (including a Nov. 26, 2014 statement by treating rheumatologist Dr. Gilbert) to the record but denied review.
District court reversed as to SSI and remanded for further proceedings, affirming the denial of DIB because claimant’s insured status had expired before the earlier 2011 adverse decision.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Did the ALJ properly assess claimant's subjective symptom testimony?	Dixon argues the ALJ failed to give clear and convincing reasons for discounting his pain and functional limitations.	The Commissioner relied on treatment characterization (conservative), lack of adverse medication effects, and hearing demeanor to discount credibility.	Court: ALJ erred—reasons given (treatment described as conservative; no side effects; ability to sit through hearing) were inaccurate or inadequate; remand to reassess credibility.
Did the ALJ properly consider treating physician Dr. Gilbert’s opinion?	Dixon says ALJ ignored or failed to discuss Dr. Gilbert’s Nov. 26, 2014 opinion showing more severe limitations.	Commissioner treated the record as not containing a disabling opinion; Appeals Council later added some Gilbert notes.	Court: ALJ should expressly consider Dr. Gilbert’s treating-physician statement on remand.
Was denial of DIB correct given insured-status and prior final decision?	Dixon sought DIB but earlier 2011 ALJ decision found not disabled; insured status expired Dec 31, 2007.	Commissioner relied on res judicata effect of prior final denial and insured-status cutoff for DIB.	Court: Denial of DIB affirmed because claimant failed to establish disability on or before insured-status expiration.

Richardson v. Perales, 402 U.S. 389 (establishes substantial-evidence review of ALJ factual findings)
Lingenfelter v. Astrue, 504 F.3d 1028 (Ninth Circuit standard on substantial evidence and symptom evaluation)
Reddick v. Chater, 157 F.3d 715 (review record as whole, weigh supporting and detracting evidence)
Molina v. Astrue, 674 F.3d 1104 (ALJ credibility and symptom testimony guidance)
Smolen v. Chater, 80 F.3d 1273 (two-step test for evaluating claimant’s subjective symptoms)
Brown-Hunter v. Colvin, 806 F.3d 487 (‘‘clear and convincing’’ reasons required absent malingering)
Treichler v. Commissioner, 775 F.3d 1090 (credibility findings must be specific and legitimate)
Trevizo v. Berryhill, 871 F.3d 664 (limits on probing claimant’s character; appropriate credibility factors)
Garrison v. Colvin, 759 F.3d 995 (credit-as-true doctrine and remand guidance)
Harman v. Apfel, 211 F.3d 1172 (remand principles; credit-as-true discretion)
Connett v. Barnhart, 340 F.3d 871 (credit-as-true rule is not mandatory)