Dutkiewicz v. Commissioner of Social Security
663 F. App'x 430
| 6th Cir. | 2016Background
- Plaintiff Joe Dutkiewicz applied for disability insurance benefits in 2012, alleging disability beginning January 25, 2012; SSA denied benefits and an ALJ denied relief; Appeals Council declined review and the district court affirmed.
- Dutkiewicz’s treating pain specialist, Dr. Michael Kolinski, opined Dutkiewicz was "unable to work."
- Reviewing state physicians (Drs. Shanthini Daniel and Lisa Mani) found Dutkiewicz not disabled and capable of sedentary work in late 2012 and early 2013.
- Medical record showed treatment with medications and non-steroid therapies for back/knee pain; questions existed about steroid injections and anticoagulant use while sitting.
- ALJ found Dutkiewicz retained capacity for a limited range of sedentary work, considered obesity and combined impairments, and found his subjective pain testimony not fully credible.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether ALJ erred by not giving controlling weight to treating specialist's opinion | Dr. Kolinski said Dutkiewicz was "unable to work" and should be given controlling weight | Commissioner: opinion is an issue reserved to the Commissioner; ALJ explained record support for sedentary RFC | No reversible error; treating opinion on disability is noncontrolling and ALJ’s implicit rejection was harmless given substantial evidence supporting sedentary RFC |
| Whether ALJ failed to consider obesity | Obesity worsens limitations and should have been credited toward disability | ALJ expressly considered obesity and its combined effect with other impairments | No error; ALJ adequately considered obesity in the sequential evaluation |
| Whether ALJ should have found a closed period of disability Jan 2012–Aug 2013 | Dutkiewicz argues he was disabled for a continuous 12-month period during that span | Commissioner relies on state reviewers’ opinions finding capacity in Nov 2012/Jan 2013 and other record evidence | Substantial evidence supports ALJ’s implicit finding no continuous 12-month disability in that period |
| Whether ALJ’s sedentary RFC and credibility findings were supported | Plaintiff contends he cannot sit for required work due to need for injections and anticoagulant and points to lengthy work history | Commissioner points to reviewing physicians, successful symptom control with medication, and record inconsistencies with the most extreme limitations | Affirmed: ALJ’s sedentary RFC and credibility determination are supported by substantial evidence |
Key Cases Cited
- Blakley v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 581 F.3d 399 (6th Cir. 2009) (standard of review and substantial-evidence review)
- Gayheart v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 710 F.3d 365 (6th Cir. 2013) (treating-source rule and requirement to give "good reasons" for discounting)
- Bass v. McMahon, 499 F.3d 506 (6th Cir. 2007) (opinions on disability are reserved to the Commissioner)
- Coldiron v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 391 F. App’x 435 (6th Cir. 2010) (harmless-error application when ALJ’s reasoning elsewhere rejects treating-physician conclusion)
- Nejat v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 359 F. App’x 574 (6th Cir. 2009) (consideration of obesity in combination with other impairments)
- Turk v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 647 F. App’x 638 (6th Cir. 2016) (closed-period disability principles)
- Walters v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 127 F.3d 525 (6th Cir. 1997) (deference to ALJ credibility findings)