Cristian A.J. v. Commissioner of Social Security

Background

Cristian A.J. applied for Disability Insurance Benefits under the Social Security Act in May 2017, alleging that he became unable to work on December 20, 2016. The Social Security Administration denied the application initially and on reconsideration. After a hearing at which Cristian testified with an attorney and a vocational expert also testified, Administrative Law Judge Dennis G. Katz denied the claim.

The administrative law judge found that Cristian had severe impairments involving hearing loss, tinnitus, and vertigo, but that none met the regulatory listings. He found that Cristian retained the residual functional capacity—the most he could still do despite his impairments—to perform work at all exertional levels with limitations involving hearing oral instructions, working at heights, and being off-task about 5% of a typical workday. The judge concluded that Cristian could perform his past relevant work as a central supply worker and was not disabled during the period considered. The Appeals Council denied review, making the administrative law judge’s decision the Commissioner’s final decision.

The parties filed competing motions for judgment on the pleadings under Rule 12(c). The court reviewed whether substantial evidence supported the Commissioner’s decision and whether the correct legal standards were applied.

Medical Opinion Evidence

Cristian challenged the treatment of an opinion from Dr. Won-Taek Choe, who stated that Cristian had frequent tinnitus attacks, progressive hearing loss, vertigo several times a year, and severe tinnitus that seriously interfered with concentration. Because Cristian filed his application after March 27, 2017, the newer regulations governing medical opinions applied. Those regulations require an administrative law judge to evaluate each opinion’s persuasiveness, particularly its supportability and consistency with the record.

The court concluded that substantial evidence supported the administrative law judge’s decision to discount Dr. Choe’s opinion. The opinion was provided on a check-box form without a supporting narrative or citations to the underlying record, and the treatment records documented only intermittent tinnitus complaints without indicating that tinnitus affected Cristian’s concentration. The court also noted that Cristian’s tinnitus predated his alleged disability onset and had not prevented him from working, while records documenting other symptoms often did not mention tinnitus.

The court rejected Cristian’s argument that the administrative law judge’s 5% off-task limitation had to match a particular medical opinion. An administrative law judge may make an assessment that does not exactly correspond to any medical opinion when the assessment is supported by substantial evidence and complies with the law. The court found that the administrative law judge reasonably accounted for some effect from tinnitus without finding that it was disabling.

Development of the Record and 2017 Earnings

Cristian also argued that the administrative law judge failed to gather enough information about whether his earnings during the first three quarters of 2017 constituted substantial gainful activity. The administrative law judge had divided Cristian’s total 2017 earnings by the nine months he worked, producing an average monthly wage of $1,513, which exceeded the 2017 guideline amount of $1,170.

Cristian argued that his earnings varied significantly during that period, especially during the second quarter, and that the administrative law judge should have determined whether he consistently performed substantial gainful activity during each month. The Commissioner did not defend the step-one analysis on its merits but argued that any error was harmless.

The court agreed that any error was harmless. Even if further development of the earnings record had changed the finding about substantial gainful activity during some or all of the first three quarters of 2017, it would not have changed the overall disability decision. The administrative law judge continued through the sequential evaluation and found, based on substantial evidence, that Cristian retained the capacity to perform his past relevant work throughout the period at issue.

Disposition

Judge Gary R. Jones denied Cristian A.J.’s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings, granted the Commissioner’s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings, and dismissed the case. The Clerk was directed to enter final judgment and close the file.