Maysee T. L. v. Kijakazi

Background

Maysee T. L. sought disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income based on physical conditions including chronic pain in her hands, feet, and back; peripheral neuropathy; spine disorders; right trigger finger; plantar fasciitis; and gout. An administrative law judge found that she had several severe impairments but retained the residual functional capacity—the most she could do despite her impairments—to perform medium work with restrictions. The administrative law judge concluded that she could perform her past work as a medical assembler and was not disabled.

The parties filed cross-motions for summary judgment. Maysee argued that the administrative law judge failed to recognize plantar fasciitis as a severe impairment, omitted necessary restrictions related to her neuropathy, spine disorders, and foot conditions, improperly evaluated her pain complaints, and improperly relied on earlier agency medical findings.

Court’s Analysis

The court concluded that any failure to identify plantar fasciitis separately as a severe impairment was harmless. The administrative law judge had considered Maysee’s foot pain, imaging showing foot enthesopathy, allegations about difficulty standing and walking, and use of a cane or walker. Maysee also did not identify a specific additional restriction that should have been included in the residual functional capacity because of plantar fasciitis.

The court likewise rejected Maysee’s argument that the residual functional capacity had to include additional restrictions for peripheral neuropathy, spine disorders, and plantar fasciitis. The court explained that Maysee had not identified what particular work-related limitations the evidence required. The court also found no error in the administrative law judge’s discussion of objective medical evidence or treatment effectiveness. The record included findings supporting and undercutting Maysee’s allegations, and treatment sometimes improved her symptoms even though it did not eliminate her pain.

The court focused on the administrative law judge’s use of Maysee’s daily activities in evaluating the intensity, persistence, and limiting effects of her pain. The administrative law judge referred to activities such as moving through heavy snow, gardening, walking, and being somewhat active. But Maysee had also been approved for 3.5 hours of personal-care assistance each day for dressing, grooming, bathing, transferring, and using the bathroom, while her aunt performed most cooking, laundry, and household chores. The court concluded that the administrative law judge’s reliance on reports of “strenuous activity” was not supported by substantial evidence in the record as a whole.

Disposition

The court vacated the administrative law judge’s residual-functional-capacity determination and decision at steps four and five. Step four concerns whether a claimant can perform past relevant work; step five concerns whether the claimant can perform other work. The court did not address the remaining challenges to the residual functional capacity because the remand was required based on the evaluation of Maysee’s pain statements.

The court ordered that Maysee T. L.’s motion for summary judgment was granted in part and denied in part. The Commissioner’s motion for summary judgment was also granted in part and denied in part. The matter was remanded to the Social Security Commissioner under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for further proceedings. Judge Tony N. Leung directed that judgment be entered.