Sonya Hunter v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner
808 F.3d 818
| 11th Cir. | 2015Background
- Hunter filed two successive disability-insurance applications: first alleging onset March 3, 2009 (denied by ALJ on Feb. 10, 2012), then a second alleging onset Feb. 11, 2012 (approved by a different ALJ).
- The second ALJ’s favorable decision finding disability as of Feb. 11, 2012 came one day after the first ALJ’s denial; Hunter did not appeal the second decision.
- Hunter sought a district-court remand of the first ALJ’s denial under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) (sentence-six) based on the subsequent favorable decision as new and material evidence.
- The district court denied remand and affirmed the first ALJ’s denial; Hunter appealed, arguing (1) the later favorable decision warranted remand, (2) the denial was not supported by substantial evidence (light-work finding), and (3) the ALJ improperly discounted her treating physician’s opinion.
- The Eleventh Circuit affirmed, holding the later favorable decision is not "evidence" for § 405(g) remand purposes, that the light-work finding was supported by substantial evidence, and that the ALJ gave adequate reasons for discounting the treating physician.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a later favorable ALJ decision constitutes "new, noncumulative evidence" warranting a § 405(g) sentence-six remand | Hunter: the subsequent favorable ALJ decision is new and material evidence that could change the outcome of the first application | Commissioner: a decision is not "evidence"; only the evidence supporting a later decision can be new and material | The court held a later ALJ decision is not evidence for § 405(g); remand denied because Hunter produced no other new evidence |
| Whether the ALJ's finding that Hunter could perform "light work" is supported by substantial evidence | Hunter: record does not support the light-work RFC and the denial is thus not supported by substantial evidence | Commissioner: medical records, provider opinions, MRIs, and vocational testimony support the light-work RFC | The court held substantial evidence supported the ALJ's light-work finding |
| Whether the ALJ improperly discounted the treating physician's opinion | Hunter: the treating physician's opinion of total disability should have been given controlling weight | Commissioner: ALJ had good cause to discount that opinion because it conflicted with medical records and other evidence | The court held the ALJ articulated adequate specific reasons (good cause) to give the treating opinion less weight |
Key Cases Cited
- Falge v. Apfel, 150 F.3d 1320 (11th Cir. 1998) (sentence-six remand standard discussed)
- Caulder v. Bowen, 791 F.2d 872 (11th Cir. 1986) (elements for remand based on new evidence)
- Luna v. Astrue, 623 F.3d 1032 (9th Cir. 2010) (later favorable decision held new, material evidence—contrasting approach)
- Allen v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec., 561 F.3d 646 (6th Cir. 2009) (later favorable decision is not itself new evidence)
- Black Diamond Coal Min. Co. v. Dir., OWCP, 95 F.3d 1079 (11th Cir. 1996) (definition and deference standard for substantial evidence)
- Moore v. Barnhart, 405 F.3d 1208 (11th Cir. 2005) (ALJ credibility and deference principles)
- Lewis v. Callahan, 125 F.3d 1436 (11th Cir. 1997) (treating-physician weight and good-cause standard)