Sheri Curler v. Comm'r of Social Security
561 F. App'x 464
6th Cir.2014Background
- Curler, born 1968, applied for SSI in Sept. 2007 alleging back, depression, anxiety, and bipolar disorder; claimed onset November 2006.
- ALJ found severe impairments: degenerative disc disease, obesity, systemic lupus erythematosus, depression, anxiety, and substance addiction in remission, and concluded RFC for a limited range of light work; denied disability.
- Treating psychiatrist Dr. Ingram provided a March 2010 form; ALJ treated it as not controlling and discounted it due to lack of clinical support and that it was a post-hoc questionnaire with no supporting records.
- State agency psychologist Dr. DeLoach (Jan. 2008) and other treatment notes supported a non-disabling profile with mild/moderate limitations; ALJ credited treatment records and other opinions.
- February 2010 and May 2010 notes from Dr. Prakash were submitted to Appeals Council and deemed not part of the record for substantial evidence review of the ALJ decision; remand requested but denied.
- Curler’s credibility for lupus-related fatigue and headaches was found not fully credible; medical exams largely showed normal gait and only mild to moderate deficits; conservative treatment consistent with non-disability.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Weight given to treating physician | Ingram’s opinions deserve controlling weight as treating source. | Treating opinions on disability are not controlling when not well-supported and are outweighed by other substantial evidence. | ALJ properly discounted March 2010 opinion; gave good reasons based on longitudinal treatment records. |
| RFC and lupus/back pain accommodations | RFC does not adequately account for lupus fatigue, headaches, and back pain. | RFC appropriately limited to light work with restricted postures; lupus and back issues accounted for. | Substantial evidence supports RFC; lupus-related fatigue and back pain accommodated; more restrictive findings not supported. |
| Claimant credibility | Curler’s lupus fatigue and pain are disabling and credible. | Medical evidence and conservative treatment undermine full credibility. | ALJ’s credibility assessment supported by substantial evidence; testimonies not fully corroborated by medical findings. |
| Post-decision evidence and remand request | New lupus-related notes justify remand under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). | New evidence submitted to Appeals Council cannot be used to reopen the ALJ decision absent good cause. | Remand denied; notes submitted after decision not part of record; good cause not shown. |
Key Cases Cited
- Colvin v. Barnhart, 475 F.3d 727 (6th Cir. 2007) (standard for review of SSA disability determinations; substantial evidence standard)
- Johnson v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 535 F. App’x 498 (6th Cir. 2013) (treating-source opinions on disability not binding; weight explained)
- Turner v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 381 F. App’x 488 (6th Cir. 2010) (treating opinion on disability/vocational factors not controlling without support)
- Foster v. Halter, 279 F.3d 348 (6th Cir. 2001) (remand for new evidence standard; good cause requirement)
- Longworth v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 402 F.3d 591 (6th Cir. 2005) (lack of physical restrictions can support non-disability finding)