Jessica J. M. v. Saul

Background

Jessica J. M. applied for disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income benefits in 2017. She alleged disability beginning September 16, 2016, based on physical conditions including spinal injuries and surgeries, degenerative disc disease, shoulder tendinosis, arthritis in her hands, fibromyalgia, chronic pain, headaches, and obesity. She also alleged anxiety and depression.

After a hearing, an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) found that several of Jessica J. M.’s conditions were severe impairments. The ALJ found that none met or medically equaled a listed impairment and determined that she had the residual functional capacity (RFC)—the most she could still do despite her impairments—to perform sedentary work with restrictions. The ALJ concluded that she could perform jobs existing in significant numbers in the national economy and was not disabled. The Social Security Appeals Council affirmed that decision.

Arguments and analysis

Jessica J. M. sought review under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) and asked the court to remand the case for further consideration. She argued that the RFC did not account for her claimed need for a wheeled walker, personal-care-attendant services, frequent medical appointments, therapy, migraines, and absences from work. She also argued that the ALJ improperly determined that her migraines did not meet the requirements of Listing 11.02.

The court reviewed the decision to determine whether it was supported by substantial evidence on the record as a whole. The court noted that the vocational expert testified that the relevant jobs would tolerate no more than one or two absences per month. But the court reasoned that three medical appointments per month would not necessarily require missing entire workdays and that the evidence supported the ALJ’s conclusion that Jessica J. M.’s claimed migraine-related absences were not as frequent or lengthy as alleged.

The court also concluded that substantial evidence supported the ALJ’s treatment of the migraines. The opinion states that Jessica J. M. did not provide objective evidence about the migraines and that the supporting subjective evidence covered only a three-month period, shorter than the 12-month duration required for disability benefits. The ALJ had considered Listing 11.02, and the court therefore rejected the argument that the ALJ failed to consider the applicable migraine listing.

Disposition

The court held that substantial evidence supported the Commissioner’s decision to deny benefits. Judge Paul A. Magnuson ordered that Jessica J. M.’s Motion for Summary Judgment was DENIED and Andrew M. Saul’s Motion for Summary Judgment was GRANTED. The court ordered judgment to be entered accordingly.