Ridge v. SSA

Filing 15

OPINION AND ORDER: 1) 13 Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED. 2) 14 Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED. 3) Decision of SSA is AFFIRMED pursuant to sentence four of 42 USC 405(g). 4) Judgment will be entered. Signed by Judge Karen K. Caldwell on 9/30/2015. (SCD)cc: COR

j8SWD.1JlSWOt011WU,UCl\V

FILED

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY
CENTRAL DIVISION AT LEXINGTON

SEP 3 0 2015
AT LEXINGTON

ROBERTR. CARR

CLERK U.S. DISTRICT COURT

CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:14-CV-362-KKC

TAMMY RIDGE
Plaintiff,

V.

OPINION AND ORDER

CAROLYN W. COLVIN,
Acting Commissioner of Social Security,
Defendant.

*******
The plaintiff Tammy Ridge brought this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) to obtain
judicial review of an administrative decision denying her claim for disability insurance benefits
and supplemental security income. The Court, having reviewed the record, will affirm the
Commissioner's decision.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
This Court's review of the decision by the Administrative Law Judge ("ALJ") is limited
to determining whether it "is supported by substantial evidence and was made pursuant to proper
legal standards." Rabbers v. Comm'r Soc. Sec., 582 F.3d 647, 651 (6th Cir.2009).
In denying Ridge's claim, the ALJ engaged in the five-step sequential process set forth in
the regulations under the Social Security Act (the "Act"). 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(a)-(e). See, e.g.,
Walters v. Comm'r ofSoc. Sec., 127 F.3d 525, 529 (6th Cir. 1997).

At step one, the ALJ determined that Ridge has not engaged in substantial gainful activity
since October 1, 2008, the alleged onset date. (Administrative Record ("AR") at 670.)

At step two, the ALJ determined that Ridge suffers from the following severe
impairments: (a) affective disorder, (b) anxiety, (c) insulin dependent juvenile diabetes with
complications including diabetic retinopathy, bilateral diabetic neuropathy, a history of diabetic
ulcers, and restless leg syndrome; (d) bilateral Dupuytren's contractures, status post a release;
and (e) degenerative disc disease, status post lumbar microdisectomy. (AR at 670.)
At step three, the ALJ found that Ridge did not have an impairment or combination of
impairments that meets or medically equals the severity of one of the listed impairments in 20
C.F.R. Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1. (AR at 670.)
Before proceeding to step four, the ALJ determined that Ridge has the residual functional
capacity (RFC) to perform" a limited range of light work" as defined by 20 C.F.R.
§§ 404.1567(b) and 416.967(b) with the following limitations:
She can lift and or carry 20 pounds occasionally and ten pounds frequently. The
claimant can stand and or walk six hours out of an eight-hour workday and sit six
hours out of an eight-hour workday, but requires a sit/stand option, with no
prolonged standing or walking in excess of thirty minutes without interruption.
She can occasionally climb ramps or stairs, but should never climb a ladder or
rope. The claimant can occasionally balance, stoop, kneel, and crouch. She can
frequently handle and finger bilaterally. The claimant should avoid all exposure to
full body vibration and hazards such as unprotected heights and dangerous
machinery. She also suffers with mental impairments, but is able to understand,
remember, and carry out simple work instructions. The claimant would have
difficulty with more detailed instructions. She is able to perform simple work
tasks and make work decisions, but would have difficulty (a) maintaining
attention and concentration for extended periods, (b) carrying out detailed
instructions, and (c) accepting criticism from supervisors. The claimant is able to
set goals realistically, but would have some difficulty reacting and adapting
appropriately to changes in the work environment.
(AR at 673.)
At step four, the ALJ found that Ridge is unable to perform any past relevant work. (AR
at 680.)

2

At step five, the ALJ determined that, considering the RFC described above and Ridge's
age, education, and work experience, she can perform jobs that exist in significant numbers in
the national economy and, thus, she is not disabled. (AR at 681.)

ANALYSIS
Ridge argues that the ALJ' s finding that she can perform "light" work is not supported by
substantial evidence. "Light work involves lifting no more than 20 pounds at a time with
frequent lifting or carrying of objects weighing up to 10 pounds." 20 C.F .R. § 404.1567(b).
Light work also "requires a good deal of walking or standing" or "sitting most of the time with
some pushing and pulling of arm or leg controls." Id.
Ridge argues that the majority of the medical evidence supports a finding that she can only
stand or walk for two hours or less in an eight-hour work day. She points to the opinions of her
treating physician, Dr. George Noe, and of the examining physicians, Dr. W.R. Stauffer and Dr.
William Waltrip.
Dr. Noe opined that Ridge can stand for about two hours and that she could sit and walk for
about four hours in an eight-hour workday. (AR at 619.) Dr. Waltrip noted that Ridge could walk
and stand for 20 minutes and that, when sitting, she has to change positions frequently. (AR at
1348.) Dr. Stauffer noted that Ridge stated she has difficulty standing for more than 30 minutes
and he found this "probably accurate." (AR at 458.) Nevertheless, he also opined that she could
stand or walk two hours in an eight-hour day. (AR at 458.)
The ALJ concluded in the RFC that Ridge "can stand and or walk six hours out of an eighthour workday" but that she must have "a sit/stand option, with no prolonged standing or walking
in excess of thirty minutes without interruption."

3

ALJs must give "controlling weight" to opinions from treating sources "[i]f [they] find that a
treating source's opinion ... is well-supported by medically acceptable clinical and laboratory
diagnostic techniques and is not inconsistent with the other substantial evidence in [the
claimant's] case record." 20 C.F.R. § 404.1527(c), (c)(2). An ALJ must provide "good reasons"
for not giving a treating physician's opinion controlling weight. Id.
The ALJ gave good reasons for rejecting Dr. Noe's determination that Ridge could not stand
for more than two hours in an eight-hour day and for rejecting the similar opinions of Drs.
Waltrip and Stauffer. The ALJ stated that he could find "no objective medical findings in the
treatment notes provided either by Dr. Noe or any of the other claimant's treating physicians"
consistent with that assessment. (AR at 680.) In her motion, Ridge does not point to any
evidence that she is so limited in her ability to walk or stand. She cites Dr. Noe's notes indicating
that her diabetes was generally "not controlled." (DE 13-1 at 10.) This is well documented.
Nevertheless, the ALJ noted that Ridge's more recent treating physician, Dr. Naren James, had
required Ridge to undergo lifestyle counseling (AR at 677, 1359) and that, by May 2013 her
blood sugars were well controlled. (AR at 1480.)
Furthermore, the ALJ made some allowances in the RFC for limitations in Ridge's ability to
stand, requiring that she have a "sit/stand option, with no prolonged standing or walking in
excess of thirty minutes without interruption."
Finally, to the extent that Ridge argues that the ALJ did not consider the state agency
physicians' opinions that Ridge could perform only sedentary work (AR at 830, 848, 884, 910),
the ALJ did discuss these opinions and noted that they found she could perform the physical
exertional requirements of "light" work. (AR at 679). As to any limitation on walking included

4

in these opinions, the ALJ discounted them, along with Dr. Noe's opinion on the same, because
there were not consistent with objective medical findings in the record. (AR at 680.)
Ridge argues that the ALJ erred in finding that Dr. Noe's treatment notes do not support his
opinion that her impairments would cause her to be absent from work six days a month. Again,
however, Ridge points only to Dr. Noe's treatment records indicating that her diabetes was
uncontrolled. As noted by the ALJ, more recent records indicate that she now has good control
over her blood sugars.
Ridge argues that the ALJ did not give good reasons for rejecting the opinion of Dr. Greg
Lynch that she had a "marked" limitation in her ability to tolerate work stress and to respond
appropriately in a work setting. The ALJ did include an allowance in his RFC for such
limitations, requiring that Ridge could only "understand, remember, and carry out simple work
instructions" but would "have difficulty with more detailed instructions." He further limited her
to "simple work tasks" and noted she "would have difficulty (a) maintaining attention and
concentration for extended periods, (b) carrying out detailed instructions, and (c) accepting
criticism from supervisors." He further noted, she "would have some difficulty reacting and
adapting appropriately to changes in the work environment." (AR at 673.) The ALJ simply
translated Dr. Lynch's general finding of "marked" impairments into a specific RFC finding.
Ridge argues that the RFC is too vague because it does not defined "extended periods" when
limiting her ability to maintain attention and concentration. Nevertheless, the vocational expert
did not indicate he had any trouble understanding the meaning of this limitation. (AR at 735.)
The Court has not located any authority requiring a greater degree of specificity in articulating
this limitation.
For all these reasons, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
5

1. The plaintifrs motion for summary judgment (DE 13) is DENIED;

2. The defendant's motion for summary judgment (DE 14) is GRANTED;
3. The decision of the Commissioner is AFFIRMED pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C.

§ 405(g) as it was supported by substantial evidence and was decided by proper legal
standards; and
4. A judgment will be entered contemporaneously with this order.

Dated: September 30, 2015

Signed By:
Karen KCaldwell
United States District Judge

6