K.K. v. Kijakazi

Background

K.K. applied for disability insurance benefits under Title II of the Social Security Act, alleging disability beginning April 17, 2016. An administrative law judge (ALJ) denied the application, and the Social Security Administration Appeals Council denied review. K.K. then sought review in the district court under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).

The ALJ found that K.K. had severe impairments involving diabetes, obesity, atherosclerosis, and atrial fibrillation after coronary artery bypass surgery. The ALJ found K.K.’s joint disease, including alleged right-hip and shoulder problems, non-severe. The ALJ assigned a residual functional capacity (RFC)—the most a person can do despite medical limitations—for light work, including standing and walking for six hours during an eight-hour workday. Based on vocational-expert testimony, the ALJ concluded that K.K. could perform his past work as an automobile salesperson.

Issues

K.K. argued that the ALJ failed to develop the record because an examining doctor referred to hip X-rays that were not included in the administrative record. K.K. also argued that the ALJ did not give adequate reasons for rejecting his testimony about the severity and limiting effects of his symptoms.

Record-development issue

The court rejected K.K.’s argument concerning the hip X-rays. It held that the record was adequate and was not ambiguous about whether the examining doctor had actually reviewed hip X-rays. K.K.’s attorney had represented at the hearing that the record was complete, and the record did not establish that a relevant hip X-ray existed or had been taken during the examination. The court concluded that the ALJ fulfilled the duty to fully and fairly develop the record.

Symptom testimony and RFC

The court held that the ALJ gave insufficient reasons for rejecting K.K.’s testimony about pain, dizziness, the need to sit and rest frequently, and difficulty standing. The ALJ relied on the lack of evidence of end-stage hip disease, K.K.’s treatment every three months, the limited pain medication documented in the records, K.K.’s failure to use a cane during the examination, and K.K.’s return to work.

The court concluded that these reasons did not adequately show that K.K. could stand for six hours without extra breaks or an assistive device. The absence of end-stage hip disease did not explain why K.K.’s pain would not limit standing before surgery became necessary. The ALJ also did not identify medical evidence showing that visits every three months were too infrequent, explain why the lack of a cane demonstrated the ability to stand for six hours, or address evidence that K.K. could sit whenever he wanted at work and that his supervisor noted that he took breaks.

Because the ALJ’s evaluation of K.K.’s testimony was inadequate, the court held that the RFC finding concerning K.K.’s ability to stand was not supported by substantial evidence. Substantial evidence means enough relevant evidence that a reasonable person could accept it as support for a conclusion.

Remedy and disposition

The court declined to award benefits under the “credit-as-true” rule, which can require payment of benefits when improperly rejected evidence is accepted and no useful administrative proceedings remain. The court found that the record did not establish whether additional limitations would prevent K.K. from performing all available work.

The court therefore granted K.K.’s summary judgment motion, denied the Commissioner’s summary judgment motion, and remanded the case to the Commissioner for further proceedings consistent with the opinion. The court’s ruling did not award benefits or decide that K.K. was disabled.