Richard D. S. v. Saul

Background

Richard D. S. challenged the Commissioner of Social Security’s denial of his application for disability insurance benefits under Title II of the Social Security Act. He alleged disability based on back injury, arthritis, degenerative disk disease, lumbar spondylosis, and related limits on sitting, standing, lifting, bending, and kneeling. His application was denied initially and on reconsideration. After a hearing, an administrative law judge issued an unfavorable decision, and the Appeals Council denied review.

To receive disability insurance benefits, Richard had to show that he was disabled on or before his date last insured, September 30, 2015. The administrative law judge found severe impairments involving degenerative disk disease of the lumbar spine and chronic myofascial pain. The judge determined that Richard could perform sedentary work, subject to postural and environmental restrictions and a sit-stand option allowing him to change positions every 20 to 30 minutes.

Issues

Richard challenged the administrative law judge’s residual functional capacity determination—the finding about the most work he could still perform despite his impairments. He argued that the judge should have given greater weight to the opinion of Dr. Clayton T. Cowl, who stated that Richard needed to change positions regularly and should avoid repetitive lifting and pushing or pulling.

Richard also argued that the administrative law judge failed to account for side effects from medical marijuana, including feeling mentally fuzzy and having heavy limbs.

Court’s reasoning

The court concluded that the sedentary-work restriction was consistent with Dr. Cowl’s opinion that Richard could occasionally lift or carry 10 pounds and frequently lift or carry less than 10 pounds. The court also found that the sit-stand option was consistent with, and more protective than, Dr. Cowl’s position-change recommendation.

The court rejected Richard’s argument that the administrative law judge needed to include a separate repetitive-pushing-and-pulling restriction. It explained that such restrictions generally have little effect on the range of unskilled sedentary jobs. Dr. Cowl had not identified limitations involving the use of Richard’s hands and fingers, and a functional capacity evaluation found that Richard could push and pull 30 pounds. The court acknowledged that the administrative law judge could have explained the treatment of Dr. Cowl’s opinion more clearly, but found that any writing deficiency did not affect the result.

The court also held that the medical-marijuana side effects did not establish disability during the relevant period. Richard began using medical marijuana nearly a year after his date last insured. The court further noted that he reported no significant side effects during follow-up visits and, at most, reported mild side effects.

Disposition

The court found substantial evidence supporting the administrative law judge’s decision. Judge Tony N. Leung ordered that Richard’s motion for summary judgment, ECF No. 11, was DENIED, and the Commissioner’s motion for summary judgment, ECF No. 13, was GRANTED.