Lori M. S. v. O'Malley

Background

Lori M. S. sought judicial review under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) of the Commissioner of Social Security’s final decision denying her Disability Insurance Benefits. She applied for benefits in June 2021, alleging disability beginning March 13, 2020. After the Social Security Administration denied the claim initially and on reconsideration, an administrative law judge (ALJ) held a telephone hearing. Lori M. S. was represented by counsel.

The ALJ found several severe impairments, including bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome, seizures, left shoulder tendonitis, generalized anxiety disorder, panic disorder, and major depression. The ALJ determined that Lori M. S. retained the residual functional capacity (RFC)—the most work she could still perform despite her limitations—to do light work with additional restrictions. Relevant restrictions included frequent handling and fingering with both hands and occasional interactions with groups of people. Relying on vocational-expert testimony, the ALJ found that she could perform her past relevant work as a secretary and was therefore not disabled.

Lori M. S. challenged the ALJ’s assessment of her physical and mental impairments and argued that the ALJ failed to resolve a conflict between the vocational expert’s testimony and the Dictionary of Occupational Titles (DOT). She requested reversal of the Commissioner’s decision and an award of benefits. The Commissioner argued that the ALJ properly evaluated the evidence and that the vocational expert’s testimony supported the finding that Lori M. S. could perform her past work.

Standard of Review

The court reviewed whether the ALJ’s decision was supported by substantial evidence and was free of legal error. Substantial evidence means relevant evidence that a reasonable person would accept as adequate to support a conclusion. The court considered the administrative record as a whole.

Carpal Tunnel Syndrome and the RFC

The court held that substantial evidence did not support the ALJ’s RFC determination concerning Lori M. S.’s carpal tunnel syndrome. The ALJ properly considered Lori M. S.’s subjective reports about hand numbness, pain, dropping objects, and limited ability to use or lift with her hands. The record also showed improvement in her left hand after surgery.

But the ALJ relied on the expectation that a future right-hand surgery would improve Lori M. S.’s symptoms and functional abilities. The court held that an ALJ may not speculate about the outcome of a future surgery or the limitations that might follow it. Because the ALJ used that speculation in assessing the RFC, the decision was not supported by substantial evidence.

The court also addressed the ALJ’s evaluation of medical opinions. Under the applicable regulations, the ALJ was required to evaluate the persuasiveness of medical opinions, including their supportability and consistency with the record. The court found that the ALJ discussed the required factors, but the reasons given for discounting treating orthopedic surgeon Dr. Thomas J. Kaiser’s opinion and relying on state-agency consultant Dr. George Erhard’s findings included speculation about future surgical improvement. On remand, the Commissioner must reconsider those opinions and any new opinion evidence using non-speculative record evidence.

Mental Impairments

The court upheld the ALJ’s RFC findings concerning Lori M. S.’s anxiety, depression, and panic disorder. The court found substantial evidence supporting the limitation to occasional interactions with groups of people and the conclusion that she could perform her past work as a secretary.

The court concluded that the ALJ considered the treatment records, mental-status examinations, medication changes and effectiveness, subjective reports, and opinions from state-agency psychological consultants and treating psychologist Dr. David L. Kuehl. Although Lori M. S.’s symptoms fluctuated, the court found that the record generally showed normal mental-status findings and improvement with medication and therapy. The court also found no error in the ALJ’s treatment of panic attacks, workplace stress, or the applicable Social Security ruling concerning stress and other non-exertional limitations.

Vocational-Expert Testimony and the DOT

The court upheld the ALJ’s reliance on the vocational expert’s testimony. The ALJ asked whether a person limited to occasional interactions with groups could perform Lori M. S.’s past work as a secretary. The vocational expert testified that secretaries generally work with individuals rather than groups and that the past work could be performed with that limitation.

The court found no unresolved conflict with the DOT because the DOT did not specify how frequently a secretary must interact socially with groups. The vocational expert stated that the testimony was consistent with the DOT, and the ALJ reasonably relied on the expert’s explanation and experience.

Disposition

The court granted in part and denied in part Lori M. S.’s motion, granted in part and denied in part the Commissioner’s motion, and remanded the matter to the Commissioner under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for further proceedings consistent with the opinion. The remand requires further evaluation of the RFC and related medical-opinion evidence concerning carpal tunnel syndrome without relying on speculation about future capabilities.