Stephanie Garcia v. Comm. of Social Security
768 F.3d 925
| 9th Cir. | 2014Background
- Stephanie Garcia received childhood SSI for intellectual disability; benefits were terminated after she turned 18 and SSA found she no longer met the adult standard.
- At an administrative hearing (2010) Garcia presented an incomplete WAIS-III: Dr. McDonald administered only the performance (nonverbal) subtest yielding a PIQ of 77; verbal and full-scale scores were not reported.
- Two reviewing experts (Drs. Middleton and Murillo) and the ALJ relied on the partial IQ results and other records to find Garcia had borderline intellectual functioning but was not disabled; a vocational expert identified light, unskilled jobs Garcia could perform.
- Garcia appealed, arguing the ALJ had a duty to develop the record by ordering a complete IQ administration; the Appeals Council denied review and the district court affirmed the Commissioner.
- The Ninth Circuit held the ALJ erred by failing to obtain complete IQ scores (verbal, performance, full-scale), and that the error was not harmless given prior low childhood IQ scores and the centrality of IQ to Listing 12.05; the case was reversed and remanded for further testing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the ALJ had a duty to develop the record by obtaining a complete set of WAIS IQ scores before denying disability for intellectual impairment | Garcia: ALJ should have ordered full IQ testing (verbal and full-scale) because partial results left the record incomplete and could change disability findings | Commissioner: partial WAIS results and experts’ reviews were sufficient; any error was harmless because record supports nondisability | The ALJ had a duty to obtain complete IQ scores; failure to do so was legal error and not harmless; remand ordered for further IQ testing |
Key Cases Cited
- Bray v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration, 554 F.3d 1219 (9th Cir. 2009) (standard of review for district court affirmance of SSA decision)
- Robbins v. Social Security Administration, 466 F.3d 880 (9th Cir. 2006) (substantial-evidence and harmless-error principles)
- Tommasetti v. Astrue, 533 F.3d 1035 (9th Cir. 2008) (harmless error standard: reversal only if error not inconsequential)
- Celaya v. Halter, 332 F.3d 1177 (9th Cir. 2003) (ALJ’s duty to fully and fairly develop the record)
- Brown v. Heckler, 713 F.2d 441 (9th Cir. 1983) (ALJ’s obligation to elicit favorable and unfavorable facts)
- Higbee v. Sullivan, 975 F.2d 558 (9th Cir. 1992) (ALJ’s duty to probe for relevant facts)
- McLeod v. Astrue, 640 F.3d 881 (9th Cir. 2011) (burden on claimant to show prejudice from failure-to-develop error; remand procedure when record insufficient)
- Mayes v. Massanari, 276 F.3d 453 (9th Cir. 2001) (ALJ duty to develop triggered by ambiguous or inadequate record)
- Tonapetyan v. Halter, 242 F.3d 1144 (9th Cir. 2001) (heightened duty when claimant is unrepresented)
- Smolen v. Chater, 80 F.3d 1273 (9th Cir. 1996) (ALJ’s duty to develop record and weigh medical evidence)