Esperanza Hernandez v. Commissioner, SSA

Filing

Opinion issued by court as to Appellant Esperanza Reyes Hernandez. Decision: Affirmed. Opinion type: Non-Published. Opinion method: Per Curiam.

Case: 12-16527

Date Filed: 07/17/2013

Page: 1 of 7

[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 12-16527
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 9:12-cv-80050-FJL

ESPERANZA REYES HERNANDEZ,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,
Defendant-Appellee.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Florida
________________________
(July 17, 2013)
Before CARNES, BARKETT and WILSON, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:

Case: 12-16527

Date Filed: 07/17/2013

Page: 2 of 7

Esperanza Hernandez appeals the magistrate judge’s order 1 affirming the
Social Security Commissioner’s (Commissioner) denial of her application for
disability insurance benefits (DIB), 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), and Supplemental Security
Income (SSI), 42 U.S.C. § 1383(c)(3). On appeal, Hernandez asserts that the
Administrative Law Judge’s (ALJ) credibility determination regarding her
complaints of pain was not supported by substantial evidence. She argues that the
ALJ erred in relying exclusively on the objective medical findings because her
case involved pain and symptoms related to fibromyalgia, which could not be
properly evaluated solely with objective testing. She further asserts that the ALJ
did not provide good cause to support the decision to give little weight to the
opinions of her treating physicians, Drs. J.A. Halim and Jean Pierre. Hernandez
asserts that the ALJ ignored evidence regarding the severity of her conditions, and
that the ALJ’s reliance on the consultative physicians was misplaced. After a
thorough review of the record and consideration of the parties’ briefs, we affirm.
I.
In Social Security appeals, we treat the decision of an ALJ as the
Commissioner’s final decision when the ALJ denies benefits and the Appeals
Council denies review of the ALJ’s decision. Doughty v. Apfel, 245 F.3d 1274,
1278 (11th Cir. 2001). We review the Commissioner’s legal conclusions de novo

1

The parties consented to proceed before a magistrate judge in the district court.
2

Case: 12-16527

Date Filed: 07/17/2013

Page: 3 of 7

and consider whether the Commissioner’s factual findings are supported by
substantial evidence. Lewis v. Barnhart, 285 F.3d 1329, 1330 (11th Cir. 2002) (per
curiam). “Substantial evidence is more than a scintilla and is such relevant
evidence as a reasonable person would accept as adequate to support a
conclusion.” Lewis v. Callahan, 125 F.3d 1436, 1440 (11th Cir. 1997).
When a claimant attempts to establish disability through her own testimony
concerning pain or other subjective symptoms, “the claimant must satisfy two parts
of a three-part test showing: (1) evidence of an underlying medical condition; and
(2) either (a) objective medical evidence confirming the severity of the alleged
pain; or (b) that the objectively determined medical condition can reasonably be
expected to give rise to the claimed pain.” Wilson v. Barnhart, 284 F.3d 1219,
1225 (11th Cir. 2002) (per curiam). “The claimant’s subjective testimony
supported by medical evidence that satisfies the standard is itself sufficient to
support a finding of disability.” Holt v. Sullivan, 921 F.2d 1221, 1223 (11th Cir.
1991) (per curiam).
“After considering a claimant’s complaints of pain, the ALJ may reject them
as not creditable, and that determination will be reviewed for substantial evidence.”
Marbury v. Sullivan, 957 F.2d 837, 839 (11th Cir. 1992) (per curiam). The ALJ
must explicitly and adequately articulate his reasons if he discredits subjective
testimony. Id. When evaluating a claimant’s subjective symptoms, the ALJ must
3

Case: 12-16527

Date Filed: 07/17/2013

Page: 4 of 7

consider such things as: (1) the claimant’s daily activities; (2) the nature and
intensity of pain and other symptoms; (3) precipitating and aggravating factors;
(4) effects of medications; and (5) treatment or measures taken by the claimant for
relief of symptoms. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1529(c)(3). We have recognized that
fibromyalgia “often lacks medical or laboratory signs, and is generally diagnosed
mostly on a[n] individual’s described symptoms,” and that the “hallmark” of
fibromyalgia is therefore “a lack of objective evidence.” Moore v. Barnhart, 405
F.3d 1208, 1211 (11th Cir. 2005) (per curiam).
A review of the record shows that substantial evidence supports the ALJ’s
credibility determination. The ALJ found that the objective medical records and
Hernandez’s self-reports to her doctors did not support the alleged severity of her
symptoms, and that the records were inconsistent with the degree of impairment
alleged by Hernandez. Furthermore, there was no explanation in the record or on
appeal as to how Hernandez was able to walk with a normal gait and have no
complaints of pain when visiting her neurological doctors, but needed a wheelchair
or ankle brace and complained of debilitating pain when seeing her orthopedic
doctors. Based on this record, substantial evidence supports the ALJ’s
determination that Hernandez’s testimony regarding the severity and limiting effect
of her pain was not credible.
II.
4

Case: 12-16527

Date Filed: 07/17/2013

Page: 5 of 7

When evaluating an applicant’s claim for social security disability benefits,
the ALJ must give “substantial weight” to the opinion of the applicant’s treating
physician “unless good cause exists for not heeding the treating physician’s
diagnosis.” Edwards v. Sullivan, 937 F.2d 580, 583 (11th Cir. 1991); see also
Broughton v. Heckler, 776 F.2d 960, 962 (11th Cir. 1985) (per curiam) (“It is not
only legally relevant but unquestionably logical that the opinions, diagnosis, and
medical evidence of a treating physician whose familiarity with the patient’s
injuries, course of treatment, and responses over a considerable length of time,
should be given considerable weight.” (alteration and internal quotation marks
omitted)).
We have held that:
‘[G]ood cause’ exists when the: (1) treating physician's opinion was
not bolstered by the evidence; (2) evidence supported a contrary
finding; or (3) treating physician’s opinion was conclusory or
inconsistent with the doctor’s own medical records. When electing to
disregard the opinion of a treating physician, the ALJ must clearly
articulate its reasons.
Phillips v. Barnhart, 357 F.3d 1232, 1241 (11th Cir. 2004) (citation omitted). If
the ALJ disregards or accords less weight to the opinion of a treating physician, the
ALJ must clearly articulate his reasons, and “the failure to do so is reversible
error.” Callahan, 125 F.3d at 1440. The opinion of a reviewing, non-examining
physician does not establish the good cause necessary to reject the opinion of a
treating physician. Lamb v. Bowen, 847 F.2d 698, 703 (11th Cir. 1988). However,
5

Case: 12-16527

Date Filed: 07/17/2013

Page: 6 of 7

good cause may arise when a treating physician’s report is wholly conclusory or
not accompanied by objective medical evidence. Crawford v. Comm’r of Soc.
Sec., 363 F.3d 1155, 1159 (11th Cir. 2004) (per curiam).
A review of the record shows that the ALJ provided good cause for
affording little weight to the opinions of Hernandez’s treating physicians because
those opinions were inconsistent with the doctors’ own treatment notes and with
the objective medical evidence. For example, in a letter dated September 15, 2010,
Dr. Halim stated that the nerve tests confirmed that Hernandez’s right carpal tunnel
syndrome was only “mild” and that the pain medication seemed to help with
Hernandez’s lower back pain. Yet, a few days letter, on September 22, 2010, Dr.
Halim wrote another letter and stated that because of Hernandez’s chronic lower
back pain and carpal tunnel, she could not work. Similarly, Dr. Pierre’s opinion
that Hernandez suffered from fibromyalgia and severe arthritis is not supported by
the record. Dr. Pierre’s report was limited to the time from November 1, 2007,
through December 31, 2008. The record indicates that Hernandez did not report
having symptoms of fibromyalgia until June 2009. Thus, the record does not
support Dr. Pierre’s assertion that Hernandez suffered from fibromyalgia during
the relevant time period—November 1, 2007, through December 31, 2008. These
inconsistences gave the ALJ good cause to accord less weight to Hernandez’s
treating physicians.
6

Case: 12-16527

Date Filed: 07/17/2013

AFFIRMED.

7

Page: 7 of 7