Johnson v. Berryhill
679 F. App'x 682
| 10th Cir. | 2017Background
- Karen Johnson applied for disability insurance benefits for Jan 1, 2006–Dec 31, 2009 (date last insured), alleging rheumatoid arthritis (RA), deep vein thrombosis, obesity, fibromyalgia, sciatica/degenerative disc disease, sleep disorders, anxiety, and depression.
- An ALJ initially found she retained the RFC for a limited range of sedentary work and was not disabled; the district court remanded, finding the ALJ failed to show consideration of all impairments.
- On remand a different ALJ found RA, DVT, obesity, and fibromyalgia were severe but that other impairments were nonsevere and did not change the prior RFC; he adopted much of the earlier credibility and RFC analysis and relied on vocational expert testimony that Johnson could perform other work.
- The Appeals Council denied review; the district court affirmed the remand decision and this appeal followed.
- Johnson argued the ALJ (1) failed to consider all impairments in combination and step-three listings, (2) improperly assessed RFC and credibility, and (3) relied on inaccurate hypotheticals and transferable-skills findings.
- The Tenth Circuit affirmed, concluding substantial evidence supported the ALJ’s step-three, RFC, credibility, and vocational findings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Step-three/listing equivalence | Johnson: impairments (RA + others, incl. degenerative disc disease, fibromyalgia, mental symptoms) meet or equal Listing 14.09D or other listings. | Commissioner: medical record lacks required specific findings; prior ALJ considered mental limits; no evidence of marked limitations needed for listing. | Affirmed — no listing-level evidence; ALJ considered combined effects and we accept his statement he reviewed all evidence. |
| Consideration of degenerative disc disease/sciatica | Johnson: ALJ ignored neck/back degenerative disease and low back pain, which caused marked ADL limits. | Commissioner: evidence showed minimal/moderate, single complaint late in period, normal spine exams, and treatment consistent with minimal work impact. | Affirmed — record does not show marked functional limitations; omission of separate discussion was not reversible error. |
| RFC and fibromyalgia timing | Johnson: fibromyalgia is severe; ALJ improperly discounted its effect on RFC because diagnosis post-DLI. | Commissioner: step-two severity is a low threshold; fibromyalgia diagnosed after DLI and pre-DLI evidence does not show functional limits affecting RFC. | Affirmed — ALJ permissibly limited consideration to evidence relating to period on or before DLI and found no RFC impact. |
| Credibility, hypotheticals, transferable skills | Johnson: ALJ improperly discredited pain/sleep/medication effects; hypotheticals omitted postural limits; transferable skills finding inadequate. | Commissioner: ALJ’s credibility findings supported by normal exams, activity (weight-loss program), inconsistent cane use, and prior RFC/hypotheticals accounted for position changes; transferable skills identified and supported by testimony. | Affirmed — credibility determination supported by substantial evidence; hypotheticals captured positional changes; transferable-skills finding identified specific skills and jobs. |
Key Cases Cited
- Wall v. Astrue, 561 F.3d 1048 (10th Cir. 2009) (explains five-step disability evaluation and approach to remand evidence)
- Mays v. Colvin, 739 F.3d 569 (10th Cir. 2014) (review standard: substantial evidence and correct legal standards)
- Smith v. Colvin, 821 F.3d 1264 (10th Cir. 2016) (court will not reweigh evidence or substitute its judgment for ALJ)
- Vigil v. Colvin, 805 F.3d 1199 (10th Cir. 2015) (ALJ must determine at step three whether impairments meet or equal a listing)
- Lax v. Astrue, 489 F.3d 1080 (10th Cir. 2007) (claimant must provide specific medical findings supporting each listing criterion)
- Sullivan v. Zebley, 493 U.S. 521 (U.S. 1990) (impairment meeting only some listing criteria does not qualify)
- Hamlin v. Barnhart, 365 F.3d 1208 (10th Cir. 2004) (evidence from earlier adjudicated periods may be relevant to later periods)
- Keyes-Zachary v. Astrue, 695 F.3d 1156 (10th Cir. 2012) (ALJ need not perform formalistic factor-by-factor credibility recitation; technical omissions may not require reversal)
- Allman v. Colvin, 813 F.3d 1326 (10th Cir. 2016) (step-two severe impairment threshold is de minimis)
- Oldham v. Astrue, 509 F.3d 1254 (10th Cir. 2007) (step-two severity finding does not determine RFC or step-five outcome)
- Newbold v. Colvin, 718 F.3d 1257 (10th Cir. 2013) (credibility determinations are for the factfinder and upheld if supported by substantial evidence)
- Dikeman v. Halter, 245 F.3d 1182 (10th Cir. 2001) (ALJ must identify specific skills and occupations when finding transferable skills)
- Wilson v. Astrue, 602 F.3d 1136 (10th Cir. 2010) (fibromyalgia can produce symptoms similar to other impairments and must be linked to the relevant time period)
- Hargis v. Sullivan, 945 F.2d 1482 (10th Cir. 1991) (evidence must relate to the time period for which benefits are sought)