K.G. v. Kijakazi

Background

K.G. sought judicial review of the Commissioner of Social Security’s decision denying her application for disability insurance benefits. The administrative law judge, or ALJ, found that K.G. had severe degenerative disc disease and right shoulder degenerative joint disease, but that her depression, anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder, and other conditions were not severe. The ALJ found that K.G. could perform light work with specified limitations and could perform her past work as a childcare attendant. The Appeals Council declined review.

K.G. challenged the ALJ’s evaluation of her physical-symptom testimony, mental impairments, left shoulder condition, past work, and residual functional capacity, or RFC. RFC is the most work a person can still perform despite medically supported limitations. K.G. requested reversal and a remand for an award of benefits. The Commissioner sought summary judgment, which is a decision based on the record when there is no material factual dispute requiring a trial.

Physical Symptoms and Pain Testimony

The court granted relief on the ALJ’s evaluation of K.G.’s testimony about pain and physical limitations. Because the ALJ found no evidence of malingering, he had to give specific, clear, and convincing reasons for discounting that testimony.

The court held that the ALJ’s reliance on generally normal gait, balance, strength, and sensation findings did not adequately contradict K.G.’s statements that pain limited how long she could walk, stand, sit, lift, and carry objects. The ALJ also cited improvement from medication, injections, physical therapy, and hydrodilation. The court found that the record showed only mild, partial, or temporary improvement followed by renewed pain, rather than sustained improvement inconsistent with K.G.’s testimony. The ALJ also did not adequately explain how errands, travel to a family wedding, or alleged hobbies conflicted with her testimony.

The court further held that the ALJ should have considered evidence of K.G.’s right shoulder surgery in March 2022, after her date last insured, or explained why that evidence was irrelevant to her condition before that date.

Mental Impairments

The court granted relief concerning K.G.’s diagnosis of persistent complex bereavement disorder. The ALJ discussed K.G.’s grief after her daughter’s death but failed to consider the diagnosed disorder either at step two of the disability analysis or when formulating the RFC. The court found that error was not harmless because the disorder was central to K.G.’s claim that she could no longer work with children.

The court denied relief on K.G.’s remaining challenges to the ALJ’s mental-health analysis. It found substantial evidence supporting the ALJ’s conclusions that some depression and anxiety symptoms improved with treatment and that K.G. retained the ability to interact with others in circumstances relevant to her past work. The court also found no identified error in the ALJ’s evaluation of the state-agency consultant’s opinion.

Left Shoulder Condition

The court upheld the ALJ’s finding that K.G.’s left shoulder condition did not become a severe impairment, or one that had to be included in the RFC, during the relevant period from February 17, 2021, through December 31, 2021. Although K.G. reported left shoulder pain during the insured period, imaging six months later showed severe left shoulder arthritis, and K.G. did not establish that the later findings required a conclusion that the impairment was severe by the earlier date.

Past Work

The court upheld the ALJ’s classification of K.G.’s past work as a nursery school attendant. K.G. argued that her childcare job was a composite job involving duties from more than one occupation, including caring for infants, changing diapers, and lifting children. The court found that she did not identify the other occupation or occupations that supposedly formed the composite job, nor show that those additional duties were primary or that the nursery-school-attendant duties were not part of her work.

Residual Functional Capacity

The court held that the RFC assessment was not supported by substantial evidence because it rested on the improper evaluation of K.G.’s physical-symptom testimony and the failure to consider her bereavement disorder. The court granted K.G.’s request for relief on this issue and denied the Commissioner’s cross-motion on it.

Disposition

The court concluded that the standard for ordering an immediate award of benefits was not satisfied because the record required further assessment of K.G.’s physical and mental impairments, subjective statements, RFC, and ability to perform past work. K.G.’s request for relief was granted in part and denied in part. The Commissioner’s cross-motion for summary judgment was granted in part and denied in part. The matter was remanded for further administrative proceedings consistent with the order, and the clerk was directed to enter judgment and close the file.