Donna M.G. v. O'Malley

Background

Donna M.G. sought judicial review under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) of the Social Security Commissioner’s final decision denying her applications for disability insurance benefits, widow’s benefits, and supplemental security income. She alleged disability based on lower-back problems, hearing loss, spinal arthritis, depression, and arthritis in her hands. She amended her alleged disability-onset date to April 1, 2019.

After a hearing, the Administrative Law Judge found severe impairments involving bilateral hearing loss, bilateral hip degenerative joint disease, lumbar osteoarthritis, and persistent depressive disorder. The Administrative Law Judge determined that Donna M.G. retained the residual functional capacity—the most she could still do despite her impairments—to perform a limited range of medium work. The limits included frequent handling and fingering, a moderate-noise environment, limited oral communication, and simple, routine, repetitive tasks that were not performed at a fast production pace.

The Administrative Law Judge found that Donna M.G. could not return to her past work as a nurse assistant but could perform other jobs existing in significant numbers in the national economy, including industrial cleaner, day worker, and stores laborer. The Administrative Law Judge therefore found her not disabled. The Appeals Council declined to review that decision, making it the Commissioner’s final decision.

Issues raised by Donna M.G.

Donna M.G. argued that the Administrative Law Judge improperly evaluated a July 2021 medical-source statement from her treating psychotherapist, Lydia Walker-Thoennes, MA, LPCC. Walker-Thoennes described Donna M.G. as markedly limited in multiple areas of mental work functioning and opined that she would need unscheduled breaks and would likely miss more than three workdays per month.

Donna M.G. also argued that the residual functional capacity did not account for the full effects of her bilateral hip degenerative joint disease and lumbar osteoarthritis. She described pain and limitations involving bending, walking, climbing, and standing.

Court’s analysis

The court concluded that substantial evidence supported the Administrative Law Judge’s decision to find Walker-Thoennes’s opinions unpersuasive. The Administrative Law Judge reasonably considered that Donna M.G. reported improvement from therapy and medication, that many mental-status examinations showed normal or mostly normal findings, and that the marked limitations were not supported by objective findings or explanations in Walker-Thoennes’s records. The court also found no error in the Administrative Law Judge’s reliance on a July 16, 2021 treatment note, even though the medical-source statement had a July 2, 2021 signature date, because the statement identified July 16 as the last contact date.

The court also upheld the Administrative Law Judge’s evaluation of Donna M.G.’s physical symptoms. The Administrative Law Judge considered her conservative treatment, including over-the-counter pain medication, supportive footwear, and exercises; her failure to pursue recommended treatments such as injections, diclofenac gel, or physical therapy; minimal imaging findings; and generally limited or normal examination findings. The court stated that her daily activities could support the decision when considered with the medical record, although those activities alone would not have been enough to reject her symptom reports.

The court applied the substantial-evidence standard, which asks whether the record contains enough relevant evidence that a reasonable person could accept it as supporting the agency’s decision. It explained that a court must affirm when substantial evidence supports the Administrative Law Judge’s decision, even if the evidence could also support a different conclusion.

Disposition

The court denied Donna M.G.’s request for remand of the Commissioner’s decision. It granted the Commissioner’s request that the decision be affirmed. The court also cancelled the scheduled announcement of decision and directed that judgment be entered accordingly.