Laure Keffer v. Michael Astrue
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 7:11-cv-00478-SGW-RSB Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999092355].. [12-2252]
Appeal: 12-2252
Doc: 22
Filed: 04/23/2013
Pg: 1 of 3
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 12-2252
LAURE ANN KEFFER,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting Commissioner of Social Security,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of Virginia, at Roanoke.
Samuel G. Wilson, District
Judge. (7:11-cv-00478-SGW-RSB)
Submitted:
April 8, 2013
Decided:
April 23, 2013
Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Mark A. Black, BRUMBERG, MACKEY & WALL, P.L.C., Roanoke,
Virginia, for Appellant.
Eric P. Kressman, Regional Chief
Counsel, Victor J. Pane, Supervisory Attorney, Timothy Reiley,
Special Assistant United States Attorney, SOCIAL SECURITY
ADMINISTRATION, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Timothy J. Heaphy,
United States Attorney, Rick Mountcastle, Assistant United
States Attorney, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 12-2252
Doc: 22
Filed: 04/23/2013
Pg: 2 of 3
PER CURIAM:
Laure Ann Keffer appeals the district court’s order
adopting the magistrate judge’s recommendation and upholding the
Commissioner of Social Security’s decision to deny her a period
of disability insurance benefits.
We have reviewed the record
and affirm.
Our
review
of
the
Commissioner’s
disability
determination is limited to evaluating whether the findings are
supported by substantial evidence and whether the correct law
was applied.
Cir.
2005)
See Johnson v. Barnhart, 434 F.3d 650, 653 (4th
(per
curiam)
(citing
42
U.S.C.
§
405(g)
(2006)).
“Substantial evidence is such relevant evidence as a reasonable
mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion.”
(internal quotation marks omitted).
or
make
credibility
decision
is
conflicting
evidence
We do not reweigh evidence
determinations
supported
by
allows
Id.
in
evaluating
substantial
reasonable
defer to the Commissioner’s decision.
whether
evidence;
minds
to
a
“[w]here
differ,”
we
Id.
On appeal, Keffer asserts that the administrative law
judge’s
(“ALJ”)
residual
functional
supported by substantial evidence.
mischaracterized
Keffer’s
capacity
finding
was
not
According to Keffer, the ALJ
evidence
relating
to
her
daily
activities, ignored the fact that her subjective complaints of
pain
were
supported
by
the
objective
2
medical
record,
and
Appeal: 12-2252
Doc: 22
Filed: 04/23/2013
Pg: 3 of 3
improperly rejected a clinical assessment of pain completed by
Dr. Bayliss, who was Keffer’s treating physician.
the
record
contentions,
convinces
us
otherwise.
substantial
evidence
Our review of
Contrary
to
supported
Keffer’s
the
ALJ’s
construction of the record, including his decision to partially
discredit Keffer’s subjective complaints of pain in light of the
objective medical evidence.
See Johnson, 434 F.3d at 658.
Nor
do we discern any reversible error in the ALJ’s decision to give
only limited weight to the terse and heavily-qualified opinion
rendered by Dr. Bayliss.
See Mastro v. Apfel, 270 F.3d 171, 178
(4th Cir. 2001).
Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district
court.
legal
before
We dispense with oral argument because the facts and
contentions
this
court
are
adequately
and
argument
presented
would
not
in
aid
the
the
materials
decisional
process.
AFFIRMED
3
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?