Davis v. Berryhill
272 F. Supp. 3d 154
| D.D.C. | 2017Background
- Lavon T. Davis (born 1991) applied for SSI in 2010 claiming disability from hydrocephalus (shunt), borderline intellectual functioning, and depression; initial ALJ denial was remanded; a second ALJ again denied benefits on March 17, 2015.
- Relevant medical evidence: consultative psychologist (Dr. Banik) found FSIQ 71 (borderline), depressive disorder, and learning issues; neurologist (Dr. Chari) found stable neurologic status and normal strength; multiple state-agency reviewers opined plaintiff could do light, unskilled work with some limitations.
- Plaintiff’s function: graduated high school with special-education supports, completed cosmetology training (no license), and had intermittent work in daycare; reported headaches, fatigue, heat intolerance, and cognitive/attention limitations.
- ALJ findings: severe impairments—hydrocephalus with shunt and learning disorder; depression found non-severe (mild limitations); RFC: light work, never climb ladders/ropes/scaffolds, avoid hazards and excessive noise, and limited to simple, routine, repetitive tasks in a non–fast-paced environment.
- Vocational expert: jobs available consistent with RFC (router, stock checker, non-postal mail clerk); missing two workdays/month or >15% off-task would preclude employment.
- District Court outcome: Magistrate Judge Harvey denied plaintiff’s motion for reversal and granted the Commissioner’s motion to affirm, holding the ALJ’s decision supported by substantial evidence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Step-two severity of depression | Davis: ALJ erred by finding depression non-severe and ignoring social limitations | Commissioner: ALJ considered depression, applied the special technique, and any step-two error was harmless because impairments were considered later | Court: Affirmed ALJ; depression non-severe supported by record and any step-two error harmless |
| RFC / function-by-function analysis | Davis: ALJ failed to perform a proper function-by-function RFC and did not bridge evidence to limitations (standing, walking, reading, math, pace) | Commissioner: ALJ provided a thorough narrative RFC, considered medical opinions and daily activities; limitations reflected in RFC | Court: ALJ’s narrative satisfied SSR 96‑8p; RFC supported by substantial evidence |
| Credibility of subjective complaints (headaches, need to nap) | Davis: ALJ improperly discredited testimony about frequency/severity of headaches and need for missed work | Commissioner: ALJ reasonably weighed medical record showing headaches controlled with OTC meds and improved post-shunt; VE testimony about absenteeism addressed but record does not show 2 days/month absences | Court: ALJ credibility determination rational and supported; no remand required |
| Weight to medical opinions (Dr. Banik’s borderline IQ) | Davis: ALJ improperly discounted examining psychologist’s borderline IQ finding and substituted lay judgment | Commissioner: ALJ permissibly weighed examining and state-review opinions and incorporated relevant limitations into RFC | Court: Although ALJ erred in rhetoric about ongoing borderline functioning, RFC incorporated comparable limitations and error was harmless; decision affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Richardson v. Perales, 402 U.S. 389 (U.S. 1971) (standard for substantial evidence review)
- Simms v. Sullivan, 877 F.2d 1047 (D.C. Cir. 1989) (review scope of SSA decisions)
- Butler v. Barnhart, 353 F.3d 992 (D.C. Cir. 2004) (RFC definition and reviewing court limitations)
- Mascio v. Colvin, 780 F.3d 632 (4th Cir. 2015) (limitations for concentration, persistence, or pace versus limiting to simple tasks)
- McIntyre v. Colvin, 758 F.3d 146 (2d Cir. 2014) (harmlessness where RFC matches medical findings re: simple tasks)
- Keyes-Zachary v. Astrue, 695 F.3d 1156 (10th Cir. 2012) (assessing harmless error when RFC aligns with medical opinions)