501 F.Supp.3d 708
D. Ariz.2020Background:
- Patricia Jackson applied for Disability Insurance Benefits alleging a disability onset of November 13, 2015; the ALJ denied benefits in a June 28, 2019 decision and the Appeals Council denied review.
- The ALJ found one severe impairment: osteoarthritis; he considered but rejected fibromyalgia as a medically determinable impairment because it "co‑occurs" with osteoarthritis and hemochromatosis.
- The ALJ also determined Jackson had no severe medically determinable mental impairment and assigned an RFC of the full range of medium work, concluding she could perform past work as an office manager.
- Jackson argued the ALJ erred in (1) treating fibromyalgia as not medically determinable/severe, (2) discounting her symptom testimony, and (3) improperly weighing medical opinion evidence.
- The district court reversed and remanded, holding the ALJ erred at step two by failing to treat fibromyalgia as a severe impairment and by not distinguishing fibromyalgia‑related symptoms from other conditions; the court upheld the ALJ’s mental‑impairment finding.
Issues:
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether fibromyalgia is a medically determinable, severe impairment at step two | Jackson: ALJ wrong to reject fibromyalgia; record shows widespread pain, 18/18 tender points, and exclusionary lab/imaging results | Commissioner: ALJ considered all pain symptoms; any error was harmless because symptoms were evaluated | Court: ALJ erred. Fibromyalgia meets de minimis threshold and must be treated as a severe impairment; error was not harmless and remand is required |
| Whether depression/short‑term memory constitute medically determinable severe mental impairments | Jackson: alleged error in not finding mental impairments severe (limited argument) | Commissioner: substantial evidence supports ALJ’s finding of no severe mental impairment (records show mild/stable symptoms) | Court: Affirmed ALJ; substantial evidence supports finding of no severe mental impairment |
| Whether ALJ properly evaluated Jackson’s subjective symptom testimony | Jackson: ALJ improperly discounted symptom testimony (argued but court did not fully reach) | Commissioner: ALJ considered pain and symptoms; any error harmless given symptom consideration | Court: Not reached on the merits—remanded for de novo evaluation because step‑two error may affect RFC and symptom analysis |
| Whether ALJ properly weighed medical opinion evidence and subpoena request | Jackson: ALJ erred in weighing medical opinions and denying subpoena of consultative examiner | Commissioner: ALJ rationale was adequate and subpoena not necessary | Court: Not addressed on merits—left for reconsideration on remand |
Key Cases Cited
- Lewis v. Apfel, 236 F.3d 503 (9th Cir. 2001) (scope of district court review of ALJ decision)
- Orn v. Astrue, 495 F.3d 625 (9th Cir. 2007) (substantial evidence standard)
- Thomas v. Barnhart, 278 F.3d 947 (9th Cir. 2002) (review limited to ALJ’s stated reasons)
- Tackett v. Apfel, 180 F.3d 1094 (9th Cir. 1999) (burden shifting and five‑step framework)
- Smolen v. Chater, 80 F.3d 1273 (9th Cir. 1996) (step‑two severity and combined effect of impairments)
- Benecke v. Barnhart, 379 F.3d 587 (9th Cir. 2004) (characteristics and evaluation of fibromyalgia)
- Revels v. Berryhill, 874 F.3d 648 (9th Cir. 2017) (treating fibromyalgia’s unique diagnostic/evidentiary issues under SSR 12‑2P)
- Hoopai v. Astrue, 499 F.3d 1071 (9th Cir. 2007) (step‑two as a de minimis threshold)
- Burch v. Barnhart, 400 F.3d 676 (9th Cir. 2005) (harmless error doctrine)
- Treichler v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec. Admin., 775 F.3d 1090 (9th Cir. 2014) (when remand for further proceedings is appropriate)
- Bray v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec. Admin., 554 F.3d 1219 (9th Cir. 2009) (status and deference to Social Security Rulings)