C.-H. v. King

Background

J. C.-H. sought review of the Social Security Administration Commissioner’s final decision denying his application for Title XVI disability benefits. The administrative judge found that J. C.-H. had severe schizoaffective disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder, and amphetamine use disorder. The administrative judge determined that his impairments met the relevant disability criteria when substance use was included, but that he could perform a full range of work with some non-exertional limits if he stopped using substances. The administrative judge then concluded that substance use was a contributing factor material to the disability determination and found J. C.-H. not disabled.

J. C.-H. raised five challenges, including arguments about the substance-use finding, the evaluation of medical opinions, other impairments, his symptom testimony, and the residual functional capacity finding. The court focused on the substance-use issue because it required remand and was dispositive.

Court’s Analysis

Under the applicable Social Security regulations and Social Security Ruling 13-2p, when a claimant is found disabled and there is evidence of drug addiction or alcoholism, the administrative judge must determine whether the substance use is material to the disability determination. For mental impairments, the administrative judge must rely on evidence showing that the claimant would not be disabled without the substance use. Improvement in a highly structured treatment setting may result from treatment for the mental disorder, rather than—or in addition to—stopping substance use.

The court held that the administrative judge failed to adequately address this requirement. The administrative judge relied entirely on records from periods when J. C.-H. was incarcerated and had access to sobriety and medication management. But the court noted that jail is a highly structured environment and that the administrative judge did not analyze whether J. C.-H.’s improvement resulted from treatment for his mental disorders, sobriety, or both. The administrative judge also did not determine that the improvement resulted from treatment for substance use alone.

The court rejected the Commissioner’s argument that the failure to cite Social Security Ruling 13-2p was harmless. The court found that the administrative judge’s reliance on jail records and failure to identify the reason for the improvement were central to the finding that substance use was material. The court therefore found non-harmless legal error.

Disposition

The court REMANDS the case for further administrative proceedings. On remand, the administrative judge may reopen the administrative record and accept additional evidence as appropriate. The court did not reach J. C.-H.’s other arguments and did not conclude that those additional grounds for remand were improper. The Clerk was instructed to close the federal case file.