Gerdes v. Commissioner of Social Security, 1:16-cv-03136

Background

Plaintiff Michael Gerdes (b. 1985) applied for DIB and SSI on Dec. 27, 2012, alleging onset Mar. 5, 2010, due to neck/back pain, depression, and social anxiety; insured status through Sept. 30, 2015.
Work history: manual labor (muffler installer, assembler, laborer, caster); stopped working March 2010 and collected unemployment while seeking accommodation-ready work through 2012.
Medical record: chiropractic treatment beginning 2008; consultative physical exam by Dr. Mary Pellicer (objective ROM limits, positive straight-leg raise); mental health evaluation by Dr. Michelle Zipperman; chiropractor Rick Morse opined limitations including missing >=4 workdays/month.
ALJ Kimberly Boyce (Dec. 19, 2014) found severe impairments (spinal disorder, depressive disorder, social anxiety), assessed an RFC for light work with restrictions (no teamwork, no required public interaction), and concluded Plaintiff could perform past relevant work as a caster; denied benefits.
On review, district court considered whether the ALJ erred in (1) weighing medical opinion evidence (examining, treating, and non-acceptable sources) and (2) partially discounting Plaintiff’s symptom testimony as not fully credible.
Court affirmed ALJ: gave partial weight to Dr. Pellicer and Dr. Zipperman, little weight to chiropractor (not an "acceptable medical source" for diagnoses), and found clear, convincing, and specific reasons for adverse credibility findings (inconsistencies with record, benefit from medication, activities, unemployment representation).

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether ALJ erred in weighing medical opinions	Gerdes: ALJ improperly discounted portions of Dr. Pellicer and Dr. Zipperman and gave insufficient weight to treating chiropractor	Commissioner: ALJ reasonably assigned weight based on supportability, consistency, and source type; chiropractor is an "other" source	ALJ did not err: partial deference to Pellicer/Zipperman proper; chiropractor given little weight because not an acceptable medical source and conflicted with other evidence
Whether ALJ improperly rejected Dr. Pellicer’s lifting/functional limits	Gerdes: Pellicer’s opinion about frequent breaks and ~6 hrs sit/stand was downplayed without rationale	Commissioner: Portions contradicted by Dr. Pellicer’s own treatment notes and lacked objective support	Held: ALJ permissibly gave "some weight" to Pellicer, rejecting inadequately supported limitations as a specific and legitimate reason
Whether ALJ improperly discounted Dr. Zipperman’s mental work-capacity opinions	Gerdes: ALJ "cherry-picked" and wrongly discounted opinions because they relied on self-report	Commissioner: ALJ gave significant weight to diagnosis but properly declined to adopt ultimate work-capacity conclusions	Held: ALJ did not err; reliance on patient report alone is not sufficient to compel the RFC conclusions and ALJ may decide ultimate capacity
Whether ALJ improperly discounted Plaintiff's symptom testimony	Gerdes: ALJ failed to explain how daily activities contradicted testimony and improperly inferred lack of treatment = lack of credibility	Commissioner: ALJ provided clear, convincing reasons (inconsistency with record, benefit from meds, activities, unemployment claims)	Held: ALJ’s adverse credibility determination is supported by substantial evidence and permissible reasons were given

Key Cases Cited

Jones v. Heckler, 760 F.2d 993 (9th Cir.) (scope of judicial review of Commissioner)
Richardson v. Perales, 402 U.S. 389 (U.S. 1971) (definition of substantial evidence)
Lester v. Chater, 81 F.3d 821 (9th Cir.) (treating/examining opinion hierarchy and standards for discounting)
Bray v. Commissioner, 554 F.3d 1219 (9th Cir.) (ALJ need not accept physicians' conclusory opinions inadequately supported)
Edlund v. Massanari, 253 F.3d 1152 (9th Cir.) (medical and vocational components of disability)
Regennitter v. Commissioner, 166 F.3d 1294 (9th Cir.) (rejecting lay/witness testimony requires germane reasons)
Copeland v. Bowen, 861 F.2d 536 (9th Cir.) (claimant’s representation to unemployment office can undercut disability claim)
Carmickle v. Commissioner, 533 F.3d 1155 (9th Cir.) (credibility and evidence consistency standards)
Tackett v. Apfel, 180 F.3d 1094 (9th Cir.) (review limits when evidence supports multiple rational interpretations)