ECKENRODE v. ASTRUE

Filing 18

SUPPLEMENTAL MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge Mark R. Hornak on 3/4/14. (bdb)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

BONNIE ECKENRODE,
Plaintiff,

)
)
)

Civil Action No.2: 13-cv-231

)

v.

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

)
)
)
)
)
)

Judge Mark R. Hornak

SUPPLEMENTAL MEMORANDUM OPINION

Mark R. Hornak, United States District Judge

This Supplemental Memorandum Opinion is in furtherance of the Opinion of the Court
on the parties' Motions for Summary Judgment, Eckenrode v. Colvin, No. 2:13-cv-00231, ECF
No. 15 (W.D. Pa. Mar. 3,2014). In that Opinion, the Court concluded that the ALl's decision,
finding Plaintiff was not disabled for purposes of the Social Security Act, was supported by
substantial evidence and granted summary judgment for the Defendant, the Commissioner of
Social Security. ECF No. 15 at 16. The Court files this Supplemental Memorandum Opinion to
address certain additional matters arguably encompassed in the parties' contentions.
The Court concluded in its Opinion that the ALJ did not err in giving little weight to the
medical opinion of Dr. Randon Simmons ("Dr. Simmons"), Plaintiff's treating psychiatrist, as to
the question of whether her mental impairments met the criteria of Listing 12.04, paragraph C.
Id. at 9-12. Listing 12.04, paragraph C requires a "medically documented history of a chronic

I Carolyn W. Colvin became the Acting Commissioner of Social Security on February 14,2013, succeeding former
1.
Astrue.
Social
Security
History-Social
Security
Commissioners,
Commissioner
Michael
http://www.ssa.govlhistory/commissioners.html(visited on January 22,2014). Consequently, Acting Commissioner
Colvin is now the official-capacity defendant in this action. Hafer v. Meta, 502 U.S. 21, 25 (l991); Fed. R. Civ. P.
25(d).

affective disorder of at least 2 years' duration that has caused more than a minimal limitation of
ability to do basic work activities, with symptoms or signs currently attenuated by medication or
psychosocial support, and one of the following:
1. Repeated episodes of decompensation, each of extended duration; or
2. A residual disease process that has resulted in such marginal adjustment that
even a minimal increase in mental demands or change in the environment
would be predicted to cause the individual to decompensate; or
3. Current history of 1 or more years' inability to function outside a highly
supportive living arrangement, with an indication of continued need for such
arrangement.
20 C.F.R. § 404, subpt. P, app. 1.
The Court considered that Plaintiff had never been hospitalized for mental health reasons
as a factor supporting the ALl's rejection of Dr. Simmons' opinion that Plaintiff met subsections
1 and 2 of paragraph C. ECF No. 15 at 12. To satisfy the requirements for "repeated episodes of
decompensation, each of extended duration," a claimant must demonstrate:
Exacerbations or temporary increases in symptoms or signs accompanied by a
loss of adaptive functioning, as manifested by difficulties in performing activities
of daily living, maintaining social relationships, or maintaining concentration,
persistence, or pace. Episodes of decompensation may be demonstrated by an
exacerbation in symptoms or signs that would ordinarily require increased
treatment or a less stressful situation (or a combination of the two). Episodes of
decompensation may be inferred from medical records showing significant
alteration in medication; or documentation of the need for a more structured
psychological support system (e.g., hospitalizations, placement in a halfway
house, or a highly structured and directing household); or other relevant
information in the record about the existence, severity, and duration of the
episode.

Gibson v. Colvin, 2013 WL 4778794, at *15-16 (citing 20 C.F.R. § 404, subpt. P, app. 1,
Listing 12.00(C)(4)).
The Court observes that Dr. Simmons' treatment notes include several changes in
medication and increases in dosage during an approximately one-year period from January 21,
2010 to January 25,2011. ECF No. 6-10 at 46-54. While an episode of decompensation may be

2

inferred from medical records showing significant alteration in medication, Plaintiff does not
argue that such changes in her medication were significant or constituted episodes of
decompensation, and in any event the Court finds no medical evidence in the record to support
such a conclusion. Dr. Simmons did not identify any events described in the record as episodes
of decompensation of extended duration, and Plaintiff does not point to any evidence
demonstrating the existence, severity, or duration of any such episodes. Additionally, in his
report, Dr. Emanuel Schnepp, the State Agency psychiatric examiner, found no evidence of
"emotional, cognitive, or behavior impairments of significant magnitude" in concluding that
Plaintiff did not meet the paragraph C criteria. ECF No. 6-9 at 48. Coupled with the fact that
Plaintiff has never been hospitalized for mental health treatment or been treated with psychiatric
medications, id., the record also contains no evidence of predictable future episodes of
decompensation that would satisfy subsection 2 of paragraph C.

Accordingly, the ALl's

decision to give little weight to Dr. Simmons' conclusion as to the requirements of Listing 12.04,
paragraph C was supported by substantial evidence in the record.

United States District Judge

Dated: March 4th , 2014
cc: All counsel of record

3