Wierimaa v. Berryhill

Background

Brian Wierimaa sought judicial review of the Social Security Administration’s final decision denying his applications for disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income. He alleged disability based primarily on physical symptoms, including tendonitis in his feet and ankles and vertigo, as well as psychological conditions discussed in the medical record. His past relevant work included janitorial work.

The administrative law judge found severe impairments of hypochondriasis, a personality disorder with obsessive behaviors, and borderline intellectual functioning. The judge found that Wierimaa did not meet or equal the requirements of the relevant listed impairments. The judge determined that Wierimaa had the residual functional capacity—the most he could still do despite his impairments—to perform work at all exertional levels, subject to a limitation to unskilled shift work. The judge then found that Wierimaa could perform his past relevant work as a janitor and therefore was not disabled.

Arguments

Wierimaa argued that the administrative law judge failed to develop the record concerning his psychological impairments and improperly considered his lack of psychological treatment. He also argued that substantial evidence did not support the findings that he failed to meet the relevant listing requirements and could perform janitorial shift work.

The Commissioner argued that the administrative law judge properly evaluated the evidence, properly considered Wierimaa’s lack of mental-health treatment, and reasonably found that he could perform janitorial shift work.

Court’s Analysis

The court held that the record was not underdeveloped. Wierimaa’s treating physician had expressed concern about his psychological well-being but stated that he did not have a specific diagnosis and had not prescribed a treatment plan clearly expected to restore Wierimaa’s ability to work. The court therefore concluded that the administrative law judge was not required to develop the record further under the cited Social Security regulation.

The court also held that substantial evidence supported the finding that Wierimaa did not satisfy the relevant mental-disorder listings. The record included medical examinations, brain imaging, balance testing, and psychological assessments. The court noted that the evidence showed some concerns about possible psychological impairment but did not objectively establish the required symptoms, severity, duration, or work-related limitations for a listed impairment.

The court further upheld the finding that Wierimaa could perform his past janitorial work on afternoon or night shifts. The court noted that Wierimaa conceded that his sleep disorder was not a severe impairment and that the record did not show that, when treated, it caused work limitations lasting at least twelve months. The court applied deferential substantial-evidence review and did not reweigh the evidence.

Disposition

The court denied Wierimaa’s motion for summary judgment, granted the Commissioner’s motion for summary judgment, affirmed the Commissioner’s decision, and dismissed the case with prejudice. Judge Franklin L. Noel ordered that judgment be entered accordingly.