Opinion

Rosalinda Higdon v. Andrew Saul

Court
District Court, C.D. California
Filed
Mar 26, 2021
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 17.9%

ALJ erred by relying upon “his own exploration and 5 assessment” of plaintiff’s medical condition rather than medical 6 evidence in record

How later courts described this case

  • ALJ erred by relying upon “his own exploration and 5 assessment” of plaintiff’s medical condition rather than medical 6 evidence in record
  • finding opioid 20 medications and steroid injections not conservative treatment for 21 fibromyalgia
  • collecting cases 26 showing “recurrent problem” of ALJs failing “to properly analyze 27 . . . fibromyalgia-related symptoms”

Written by the judges who cited it.

The opinion

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

ROSALINDA H.,1 ) Case No. SACV 19-1622-JPR

11

)

Plaintiff, )

12

) MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER

v. ) REVERSING COMMISSIONER

13

)

ANDREW SAUL, Commissioner )

14

of Social Security, )

)

15

Defendant. )

)

16

)

17 I. PROCEEDINGS

18 Plaintiff seeks review of the Commissioner’s final decision

19 denying her applications for Social Security disability income

20 benefits (“DIB”) and Supplemental Security Income (“SSI”). The

21 parties consented to the jurisdiction of the undersigned under 28

22 U.S.C. § 636(c). The matter is before the Court on the parties’

23 Joint Stipulation, filed May 12, 2020, which the Court has taken

24 under submission without oral argument. For the reasons stated

25 below, the Commissioner’s decision is reversed and this action is

26

27 1 Plaintiff’s name is partially redacted in line with

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5.2(c)(2)(B) and the

28 recommendation of the Committee on Court Administration and Case

Management of the Judicial Conference of the United States.

1 remanded for further proceedings.

2 II. BACKGROUND

3 Plaintiff was born in 1972. (Administrative Record (“AR”)

4 344.) She completed high school (AR 386) and last worked as a

5 billing clerk (AR 116-17, 386, 393-94).

6 Plaintiff applied for DIB and SSI on October 19 and 30,

7 2015, respectively, alleging a disability onset date of August

8 18, 2015, based on fibromyalgia, migraines, restless-leg

9 syndrome, and sleep apnea. (AR 344-50, 385-86.) After her

10 applications and requests for reconsideration were denied (AR

11 225-40, 243-60, 265-69, 271-75), she requested a hearing before

12 an Administrative Law Judge (AR 276-77). One was held on

13 February 13, 2018, at which Plaintiff, who was represented by

14 counsel, testified, as did a vocational expert. (AR 112-34.) In

15 a written decision issued May 31, 2018, the ALJ found her not

16 disabled. (AR 97-110.) She sought Appeals Council review

17 (see AR 340-43, 475-76), which was denied on July 10, 2019 (AR 1-

18 7). This action followed.

19 III. STANDARD OF REVIEW

20 Under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), a district court may review the

21 Commissioner’s decision to deny benefits. The ALJ’s findings and

22 decision should be upheld if they are free of legal error and

23 supported by substantial evidence based on the record as a whole.

24 See Richardson v. Perales, 402 U.S. 389, 401 (1971); Parra v.

25 Astrue, 481 F.3d 742, 746 (9th Cir. 2007). Substantial evidence

26 means such evidence as a reasonable person might accept as

27 adequate to support a conclusion. Richardson, 402 U.S. at 401;

28 Lingenfelter v. Astrue, 504 F.3d 1028, 1035 (9th Cir. 2007). It

1 is more than a scintilla but less than a preponderance.

2 Lingenfelter, 504 F.3d at 1035 (citing Robbins v. Soc. Sec.

3 Admin., 466 F.3d 880, 882 (9th Cir. 2006)). “[W]hatever the

4 meaning of ‘substantial’ in other contexts, the threshold for

5 such evidentiary sufficiency is not high.” Biestek v. Berryhill,

6 139 S. Ct. 1148, 1154 (2019). To determine whether substantial

7 evidence supports a finding, the court “must review the

8 administrative record as a whole, weighing both the evidence that

9 supports and the evidence that detracts from the Commissioner’s

10 conclusion.” Reddick v. Chater, 157 F.3d 715, 720 (9th Cir.

11 1998). “If the evidence can reasonably support either affirming

12 or reversing,” the court “may not substitute its judgment” for

13 the Commissioner’s. Id. at 720-21.

14 IV. THE EVALUATION OF DISABILITY

15 People are “disabled” for purposes of receiving Social

16 Security benefits if they are unable to engage in any substantial

17 gainful activity owing to a physical or mental impairment that is

18 expected to result in death or has lasted, or is expected to

19 last, for a continuous period of at least 12 months. 42 U.S.C.

20 § 423(d)(1)(A); Drouin v. Sullivan, 966 F.2d 1255, 1257 (9th Cir.

21 1992).

22 A. The Five-Step Evaluation Process

23 The ALJ follows a five-step evaluation process to assess

24 whether a claimant is disabled. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4),

25 416.920(a)(4); Lester v. Chater, 81 F.3d 821, 828 n.5 (9th Cir.

26 1995) (as amended Apr. 9, 1996). In the first step, the

27 Commissioner must determine whether the claimant is currently

28 engaged in substantial gainful activity; if so, the claimant is

1 not disabled and the claim must be denied. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(i),

2 416.920(a)(4)(i).

3 If the claimant is not engaged in substantial gainful

4 activity, the second step requires the Commissioner to determine

5 whether the claimant has a “severe” impairment or combination of

6 impairments significantly limiting her ability to do basic work

7 activities; if not, the claimant is not disabled and her claim

8 must be denied. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(ii), 416.920(a)(4)(ii) & (c).

9 If the claimant has a “severe” impairment or combination of

10 impairments, the third step requires the Commissioner to

11 determine whether the impairment or combination of impairments

12 meets or equals an impairment in the Listing of Impairments set

13 forth at 20 C.F.R. part 404, subpart P, appendix 1; if so,

14 disability is conclusively presumed. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(iii),

15 416.920(a)(4)(iii) & (d).

16 If the claimant’s impairment or combination of impairments

17 does not meet or equal an impairment in the Listing, the fourth

18 step requires the Commissioner to determine whether the claimant

19 has sufficient residual functional capacity (“RFC”)2 to perform

20 her past work; if so, she is not disabled and the claim must be

21 denied. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(iv), 416.920(a)(4)(iv). The claimant

22 has the burden of proving she is unable to perform past relevant

23 work. Drouin, 966 F.2d at 1257. If the claimant meets that

24 burden, a prima facie case of disability is established. Id.

25

2 RFC is what a claimant can do despite existing exertional

26

and nonexertional limitations. §§ 404.1545(a)(1), 416.945(a)(1);

27 see Cooper v. Sullivan, 880 F.2d 1152, 1155 n.5 (9th Cir. 1989).

The Commissioner assesses the claimant’s RFC between steps three

28 and four. Laborin v. Berryhill, 867 F.3d 1151, 1153 (9th Cir.

2017) (citing § 416.920(a)(4)).

1 If that happens or if the claimant has no past relevant

2 work, the Commissioner bears the burden of establishing that the

3 claimant is not disabled because she can perform other

4 substantial gainful work available in the national economy, the

5 fifth and final step of the sequential analysis.

6 §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(v), 416.920(a)(4)(v), 416.960(b).

7 B. The ALJ’s Application of the Five-Step Process

8 At step one, the ALJ found that Plaintiff had not engaged in

9 substantial gainful activity since August 18, 2015, the alleged

10 onset date; her date last insured was December 31, 2020. (AR

11 99.) At step two, he concluded that she had the severe

12 impairment of fibromyalgia. (AR 100.) At step three, he

13 determined that her impairment did not meet or equal a Listing.

14 (AR 102.) At step four, he found an RFC allowing her to perform

15 a range of light work:

16 the claimant can lift and/or carry 20 pounds occasionally

17 and 10 pounds frequently; can stand and/or walk for six

18 hours out of an eight-hour workday; can sit for six hours

19 out of an eight-hour workday; cannot climb ladders, rope

20 or scaffolds; can occasionally climb ramps and stairs;

21 can occasionally stoop, kneel, crouch, and crawl; and can

22 frequently balance.

23 (Id.) The ALJ concluded that Plaintiff could do her past

24 relevant work as a billing clerk as generally performed in the

25 national economy. (AR 104-05.) Thus, he found her not disabled.

26 (AR 105.)

27

28

1 V. DISCUSSION

2 A. The ALJ Did Not Properly Evaluate Plaintiff’s

3 Subjective Symptom Testimony

4 Plaintiff claims that the ALJ “failed to provide clear and

5 convincing reasons to reject [her] subjective limitations.” (J.

6 Stip. at 4.) As explained below, the ALJ erred, and remand is

7 warranted.

8 1. Applicable law

9 An ALJ’s assessment of a claimant’s allegations concerning

10 the severity of her symptoms is entitled to “great weight.”

11 Weetman v. Sullivan, 877 F.2d 20, 22 (9th Cir. 1989) (as amended)

12 (citation omitted); Nyman v. Heckler, 779 F.2d 528, 531 (9th Cir.

13 1985) (as amended Feb. 24, 1986). “[T]he ALJ is not required to

14 believe every allegation of disabling pain, or else disability

15 benefits would be available for the asking, a result plainly

16 contrary to 42 U.S.C. § 423(d)(5)(A).” Molina v. Astrue, 674

17 F.3d 1104, 1112 (9th Cir. 2012) (citing Fair v. Bowen, 885 F.2d

18 597, 603 (9th Cir. 1989)).

19 In evaluating a claimant’s subjective symptom testimony, the

20 ALJ engages in a two-step analysis. See Lingenfelter, 504 F.3d

21 at 1035-36; see also SSR 16-3p, 2016 WL 1119029, at *3 (Mar. 16,

22 2016). “First, the ALJ must determine whether the claimant has

23 presented objective medical evidence of an underlying impairment

24 [that] could reasonably be expected to produce the pain or other

25 symptoms alleged.” Lingenfelter, 504 F.3d at 1036. If such

26 objective medical evidence exists, the ALJ may not reject a

27 claimant’s testimony “simply because there is no showing that the

28 impairment can reasonably produce the degree of symptom alleged.”

1 Smolen v. Chater, 80 F.3d 1273, 1282 (9th Cir. 1996) (emphasis in

2 original).

3 If the claimant meets the first test, the ALJ may discount

4 the claimant’s subjective symptom testimony only if he makes

5 specific findings that support the conclusion. See Berry v.

6 Astrue, 622 F.3d 1228, 1234 (9th Cir. 2010). Absent a finding or

7 affirmative evidence of malingering, the ALJ must provide a

8 “clear and convincing” reason for rejecting the claimant’s

9 testimony. Brown-Hunter v. Colvin, 806 F.3d 487, 493 (9th Cir.

10 2015) (as amended) (citing Lingenfelter, 504 F.3d at 1036);

11 Treichler v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec. Admin., 775 F.3d 1090, 1102 (9th

12 Cir. 2014). If the ALJ’s evaluation of a plaintiff’s alleged

13 symptoms is supported by substantial evidence in the record, the

14 reviewing court “may not engage in second-guessing.” Thomas v.

15 Barnhart, 278 F.3d 947, 959 (9th Cir. 2002).

16 2. Relevant background

17 a. Plaintiff’s relevant medical history

18 Plaintiff saw family-medicine practitioner Luis Villa for

19 fibromyalgia on March 31, 2015. (AR 482-84.) Her “[a]ggravating

20 factors include[d] muscular aches and pains and arthralgias,”3

21 and her symptoms were “chronic and . . . poorly controlled.” (AR

22 482.) Dr. Villa assessed her with myalgia and myositis,4

23

3 Arthralgias are aching pains in the joints without

24 swelling. Arthritis vs. Arthralgia: What’s the Difference?,

Healthline, https://www.healthline.com/health/

25

rheumatoid-arthritis/arthralgia (last visited Mar. 24, 2021).

26

4 Myalgia are muscle aches. What You Need To Know About

27 Muscle Aches and Pains, Healthline, https://www.healthline.com/

health/muscle-aches (last visited Mar. 24, 2021). Myositis is

28 chronic, progressive muscle inflammation thought to be an

autoimmune condition that causes the body to attack the muscles;

1 “addressed her [fibromyalgia] and its effects on her pain and

2 emphasized [a] heart healthy diet . . . [and] her weight,” and

3 noted “[e]levated ferritin,”5 chronic nonalcohol-related liver

4 disease, and “prediabetes.” (AR 483.) He referred her to a

5 rheumatologist, describing her as a “patient with severe

6 fibromyalgia in need of further treatment.” (Id.; see also AR

7 488.)

8 Rheumatologist Andrew Concoff examined Plaintiff on June 10,

9 2015. (AR 590-93.) She reported the “gradual onset of body

10 aches [with] bone popping [and] pain in 2007” and “head to toe”

11 pain that “fe[lt] like [a] big bruise.” (AR 590.) Her

12 “shoulders, el[bo]ws, wrists, knees, and low back” were affected.

13 (Id.) She also complained of lower-back pain that “radiate[d] to

14 [her] bilateral lateral hips” and “[p]ain with sitting and

15 standing” and “light palpation of [the] skin.” (Id.) Her pain

16 had become “10 [times] worse, and cause[d] her to miss work.”

17 (Id.) She reported “difficulty falling and staying asleep,”

18 “disrupted” sleep from pain with movement, “[d]aytime fatigue,”

19 “hair thinning,” recurring stress-induced skin rash to her chin,

20 and “[r]ecurrent” urinary tract infections. (Id.) Her symptoms

21 were “constant,” and her pain level was nine of 10, radiating to

22 her back, hips, and shoulders. (AR 591.) She had been taking

23

researchers believe it may be caused by rheumatoid arthritis,

24 lupus, viruses, or drug toxicity. What Is Myositis and How Can

It Be Treated?, Healthline, https://www.healthline.com/health/

25

myositis#causes (last visited Mar. 24, 2021).

26

5 Ferritin is a blood protein containing iron; an elevated

27 level may signify liver disease, rheumatoid arthritis, other

inflammatory conditions, or hyperthyroidism. Ferritin Test, Mayo

28 Clinic, https://www.mayoclinic.org/tests-procedures/ferritin-

test/about/pac-20384928 (last visited Mar. 24, 2021).

1 Cymbalta6 daily since 2007. (AR 590.)

2 Dr. Concoff’s systems review revealed fatigue,

3 “headache[s],” “night sweats,” and “recent weight gain [of] 40

4 [pounds]”; “[w]orsening central vision, foreign body sensation in

5 eye, dryness of the eyes, eye pain, [and] bloodshot eyes”; “chest

6 pain or discomfort and palpitations,” “[d]yspnea,”7 and

7 “[h]eartburn and nausea”; “nocturia and dysuria”8; “muscle

8 weakness, sexual complaints, . . . loss of hair from the head or

9 body,” “easy bruising,” “[m]uscle aches, arthralgias, muscle

10 spasms, swelling localized to one or more joints

11 wrist/shoulders/back/hips/knees/ankles, [and] “localized joint

12 stiffness . . . worse in the morning 2 hours”; “[d]izziness and

13 hyperesthesia”9; “[a]nxiety with persistent worry, depression and

14 initial insomnia”; and “[p]hotosensitivity.” (AR 592.)

15 Examination found cervical spine “abnormalities,” 18 of 18

16

17

6 Cymbalta, or duloxetine, treats depression and anxiety.

18 See Cymbalta, WebMD, https://www.webmd.com/drugs/2/drug-91491/

cymbalta-oral/details (last visited Mar. 24, 2021). It is also

19

approved for use to help relieve nerve and back pain associated

20 with fibromyalgia. See id.

21 7 Dyspnea is shortness of breath. Dyspnea, Healthline,

https://www.healthline.com/health/dyspnea (last visited Mar. 24,

22 2021).

23 8 Nocturia is having to urinate often during the night.

Nocturia, Cleveland Clinic, https://my.clevelandclinic.org/

24 health/diseases/14510-nocturia (last visited Mar. 24, 2021).

Dysuria is painful urination. Dysuria, Cleveland Clinic,

25

https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/diseases/

26 15176-dysuria-painful-urination (last visited Mar. 24, 2021).

27 9 Hyperesthesia is an increased sensitivity to sight, touch,

sound, or smell. Hyperesthesia, Healthline, https://

28 www.healthline.com/health/hyperesthesia (last visited Mar. 24,

2021).

1 fibromyalgia tender points,10 and “abnormal posture,” with

2 “rounded shoulders” but normal otherwise. (AR 592-93.)

3 On July 1, 2015, Dr. Concoff evaluated Plaintiff for

4 fibromyalgia and lupus and reviewed her lab results. (AR 689.)

5 She reported that her pain had worsened, causing her to miss work

6 the two days prior, and she had stumbled and fallen from lower-

7 back and knee pain. (Id.) Among other things, her active

8

problems were “[a]bnormal antinuclear antibody,”11 “[a]rthropathy

9 of multiple sites,” “[f]atigue,” “[m]igraine headache,” and

10 “[m]orning stiffness of joints.” (Id.) Examination results

11 showed cervical-spine abnormalities and 18 of 18 fibromyalgia

12 tender points. (AR 690.) He administered “Depo Medrol 80 mg

13

into [her] left deltoid”12 and recommended further testing for

14 “systemic autoimmunity” and that she continue to take Cymbalta,

15

16 10 Tender points are 18 specific areas of the body tested

under the pre-2010 diagnostic approach for fibromyalgia; if 11 of

17 them were tender when firm pressure was applied, a positive

diagnosis was supported. Fibromyalgia: Understand How It’s

18 Diagnosed, Mayo Clinic, https://www.mayoclinic.org/

diseases-conditions/fibromyalgia/in-depth/fibromyalgia-symptoms/

19

art-20045401 (last visited Mar. 24, 2021). Because fibromyalgia

20 symptoms can come and go and be associated with other conditions

that must be excluded, diagnostic guidelines now require finding

21 “widespread pain throughout [the] body for at least three

months,” with “widespread” meaning “pain on both sides of [the]

22 body, as well as above and below [the] waist.” Id.

23 11 Antinuclear antibody, or ANA, tests measure the amount of

antibodies made by the immune system, too many of which can

24 signify an autoimmune disease. Antinuclear Antibody Panel (ANA

Test), Healthline, https://www.healthline.com/health/

25

antinuclear-antibody-panel (last visited Mar. 24, 2021).

26

12 Depo-Medrol, or methylprednisolone, is a corticosteroid

27 hormone injected to treat pain and swelling occurring with

arthritis and other joint disorders. Depo-Medrol Vial, WebMD,

28 https://www.webmd.com/drugs/2/drug-6160/depo-medrol-injection/

details (last visited Mar. 24, 2021).

1 obtain a sleep study, and consider “pool therapy,”13

2 “acupuncture,” “biofeedback/mindfulness meditation,” and vitamin

3 D. (AR 690, 693.)

4 On August 20, 2015, Dr. Concoff reviewed test results and

5 ordered “further labs for systemic autoimmunity,” recommending

6 that Plaintiff remain “off work until follow-up” and “consider

7 [a] pain management program.” (AR 686-87.) She had reported

8 worsening pain, with “pins and needles” in her “right deltoid

9 area and right thigh,” “near accidents in car from driving,”

10 “[l]osing stren[g]th from sharp pains to knees,” and continued

11 severe lower-back pain and worsened sleep because of pain. (AR

12 684.)

13 Pain specialist Arthur Zepeda examined Plaintiff on

14 September 24, 2015. (AR 679-83.) She reported constant pain,

15 describing it as “heavy, tender, splitting[] sensation, stabbing,

16 punishing-cruel sensation, and a throbbing, cramping, hot-

17 burning, aching, tiring-exhausting, sickening[] sensation” that

18 was worse with “bending, lifting, coughing, sneezing, sexual

19 intercourse, standing a long time, sitting a long time, [and]

20 walking.” (AR 679.) She also felt “blue all the time.” (Id.)

21 His examination yielded mostly normal results, with a normal

22 range of motion, except “[p]alpation of the thoracic and lumbar

23 facets and lumbar intervertebral spaces reveal[ed] pain,” as did

24 “palpation of the cervical facets,” and she had pain with

25 cervical-spine movement and “palpable trigger points in the

26 muscles of the head and neck.” (AR 681.) He recommended a

27

28 13 Plaintiff apparently later “[d]ecline[d] Aqua-therapy.”

(AR 211, 780.)

1 “chronic pain program”; prescribed an anti-inflammatory, a cream

2 for her knees and shoulders, and a restless-leg medication; and

3 suggested a possible increase in Cymbalta dosage. (AR 683.)

4 On October 22 and December 18, 2015, Plaintiff answered

5 pain-management questionnaires, indicating “constant” pain

6 averaging from five to nine of 10, made worse by bending,

7 prolonged sitting, coughing, sneezing, lifting, prolonged

8 standing, sexual intercourse, and walking. (AR 651-52.)

9 At her next appointment with Dr. Concoff, in October 2015,

10 he found that the further laboratory tests were “without

11 conclusive evidence of systemic autoimmunity” and continued her

12 prescriptions and his recommendations for alternative therapies

13 and a pain-management program. (AR 678; see AR 674-77.) Several

14 appointments with her primary-care provider for chronic pain and

15 other complaints at the end of 2015 indicate that she was

16 awaiting referral to such a program. (See AR 659, 673.)

17 Plaintiff had check-ups and fibromyalgia follow-ups with

18 family-medicine specialist Jose L. Valdez from March 3, 2016, to

19 February 20, 2017. (See AR 622-36.) Dr. Valdez referred her to

20 an “in-network rheumatologist,” assessing her with fibromyalgia,

21 “chronic pain,” “restless leg syndrome,” “menopause syndrome,”

22 “migraine syndrome,” and “BRCA 2 [positive].”14 (AR 623-24.) On

23 July 19, 2016, he noted that “fibromyalgia — improve[d with]

24

25

14 BRCA2, or breast cancer gene two, means the patient

26

possesses a harmful variant of the gene that elevates the risk of

27 developing breast or ovarian cancer. BRCA Gene Mutations: Cancer

Risk & Genetic Mutations, Nat’l Cancer Inst., https://

28 www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes-prevention/genetics/

brca-fact-sheet (last visited Mar. 24, 2021).

1 gabapentin,”15 and on February 2, 2017, he noted her request for

2 referral to a rheumatologist for “worsening joint pain,”

3 including “both hands [with] inflammation” and “tenderness.” (AR

4 627, 633.) At the February appointment, he further remarked that

5 “pain [wa]s at its worst” during the “past 2 months.” (AR 634.)

6 Treatment records from Arthritis and Osteoporosis Medical

7 Center from March 26, 2017, to February 9, 2018, show exam

8 findings of neck, shoulder, and knee pain and “abnormal” and

9 limited range of motion in the shoulders, knees, and cervical

10 spine at every appointment. (See AR 208-21, 752-62, 765-67, 773-

11 74, 777-78, 782-83.) She had 12 of 18 positive trigger points at

12 appointments in April, May, June, October, and December 2017 and

13 February 2018. (AR 210, 762, 767, 774, 778, 783.) Her treatment

14 plan included myofascial trigger-point injections16 and various

15 medications. (AR 763-64, 770-71, 775.) An MRI of her lumbar

16 spine on November 17, 2017, was largely unremarkable except for a

17 “central disc bulge measuring approximately 2.5 [millimeters]” at

18 L5-S1, with “no significant spinal canal compromise.” (AR 759.)

19 Treatment records from MD Health Clinics reveal appointments

20 weekly in December 2017 and January 2018 for fibromyalgia,

21

22 15 Gabapentin, brand-named Neurontin, is an anticonvulsant

that “works in the brain to prevent seizures and relieve pain for

23 certain conditions in the nervous system.” Gabapentin, Mayo

Clinic, https://www.mayoclinic.org/drugs-supplements/

24 gabapentin-oral-route/description/drg-20064011 (last visited Mar.

24, 2021).

25

16 Myofascial trigger-point injections involve injecting

26

small amounts of anesthetic and steroid into trigger points to

27 relieve pain associated with fibromyalgia. Trigger Point

Injections, Cleveland Clinic, https://my.clevelandclinic.org/

28 health/treatments/17582-trigger-point-injection (last visited

Mar. 24, 2021).

1 anxiety, migraines, bilateral knee pain, rheumatoid arthritis,

2 insomnia, and shoulder and back pain. (See AR 747-51.) An

3 undated medication list reflects that Plaintiff had taken various

4 opiod-based medications, among others. (AR 466.)

5 b. Plaintiff’s statements

6 On November 28, 2015, Plaintiff stated in a function report

7 that her ability to work was limited by “severe fibromyalgia for

8 over 7 y[ea]rs[,] migraines,” and insomnia “due to pain [and]

9 restless leg syndrome.” (AR 397; see AR 398-405.) Her daily

10 activities included a “little bit of walking, sitting from time

11 to time,” and lying down “due to severe body pains.” (AR 398.)

12 She was “unable to help” take care of her husband and 13-year-old

13 son,17 and her sleep was disrupted by “sleep apnea” and “severe”

14 fibromyalgia, with “pain from head to toe.” (Id.) Her husband

15 helped her dress, bathe, and take care of her hair because her

16 arm and shoulder pain limited her movement. (Id.) He helped her

17 out of bed because her “arms, shoulder, knees, [and] legs, [we]re

18 very painful.” (Id.) He also prepared meals because she

19 couldn’t move her wrist, and her “wrists, arms, [and] hands” were

20 “to[o] painful.” (AR 399.) Pain prevented her from doing daily

21 chores. (Id.) She didn’t go out alone because her pain would

22 cause her to “lose strength in [her] body,” and she often stayed

23 in the car while her husband bought groceries because of “too

24 much pain.” (AR 400.)

25

26

17 In July 2018, however, Plaintiff told a psychiatrist that

27 she was “stressed” from “being sole care taker of h[u]sband and

both elderly and sickly mother and father in law.” (AR 60; see

28 also AR 60, 65-66 (noting that Plaintiff was “primary caretaker

of husband who has brain tumor and is disabled”).)

1 Her interests included “spending family time,” but she

2 hadn’t done that “at all in the past y[ea]r since her pain” had

3 become “severe.” (AR 401.) She hadn’t participated in social

4 activities in over a year because she couldn’t walk much and

5 would need to lie down. (AR 402.) Her ability to lift, squat,

6 bend, stand, reach, walk, sit, kneel, climb stairs, and use her

7 hands was affected, and she could not lift at all because of the

8 pain in her shoulders and entire body. (Id.) She could pay

9 attention for only about five minutes before needing to rest,

10 move, or lie down; had trouble finishing tasks; and felt

11 depressed and didn’t handle stress well because her pain made her

12 “very emotional.” (AR 402-03.) She feared insomnia and her

13 progressing pain and depression. (AR 403.) She couldn’t take

14 medicine for her migraines because it interacted with her

15 fibromyalgia medicine, so she slept “very little due to severe

16 body pains from head to toe [and] restless leg syndrome.” (AR

17 404.)

18 At her hearing, Plaintiff described having fibromyalgia for

19 10 years and feeling widespread “[h]ead to toe” pain that felt

20 like “a big bruise, a walking bruise — so severe that it’s very

21 hard to even type, hold my arms, my back, my lower back, my

22 knees.” (AR 120.) She reported “daily” migraine — not “regular”

23 — headaches that lasted for “weeks.” (Id.; see AR 128.) When

24 she had a migraine, she would need to “[l]ay down for hours and

25 hours,” and that happened “almost on a daily basis.” (AR 128.)

26 Her sleep medication had stopped working, so she was “going

27 through pain management with different types of medication.” (AR

28 120.) She typically slept an hour a night, “if that.” (AR 121.)

1 The ALJ went through her list of medications, and Plaintiff

2 described having “fog moments,” including “getting lost when

3 [she] dr[o]ve,” being “very forgetful,” and lacking

4 “concentration,” which she had been told could be side effects of

5 her medicine. (AR 123.)

6 Plaintiff tried to cook and clean but had “many pauses in-

7 between from [her] back and [her] pains” and was “so forgetful”;

8 sometimes she had to “stop and think where [she was] going when

9 [she was] driving,” which was “[s]cary.” (AR 127.)

10 c. The ALJ’s decision

11 The ALJ found that Plaintiff’s “medically determinable

12 impairments could reasonably be expected to cause the alleged

13 symptoms; however, [her] statements and allegations concerning

14 the intensity, persistence and limiting effects of these symptoms

15 [we]re not entirely consistent with the medical evidence and

16 other evidence in the record.” (AR 103.) He gave three reasons

17 for discounting her symptom statements and testimony: (1)

18 “diagnostic findings . . . show[ed] no significant neurological

19 deficits or gait abnormalities to justify greater functional

20 restrictions”; (2) she had had “rather conservative” treatment;

21 and (3) there was “little documentation” of the side effects she

22 complained of at the hearing. (AR 104.) He further noted that

23 she “had complaints of muscular aches and pains for which she was

24 prescribed Cymbalta,” but there was “no known history of

25 rheumatoid arthritis.” (AR 103.) “Her examination revealed

26 numerous trigger point tenderness [sic] in the shoulder, knees,

27 and back; however, her gait, motor and balance were normal.”

28 (Id.) Subsequent treatment notes in 2015 “conveyed normal

1 physical examination findings except for diffuse tenderness to

2 palpation”; she was referred for pain management, pool therapy,

3 acupuncture, and biofeedback therapy; and medication was titrated

4 upward for “better symptom control.” (Id.)

5 The ALJ recognized that treatment notes from 2016 and 2017

6 reflected that Plaintiff complained of “worsened fibromyalgia

7 pain, but her physical examination findings remained largely

8 unremarkable except for tenderness to palpation of trigger points

9 and neck and back pain with limited range of motion in the

10 spine.” (AR 104.) Further, a lumbar-spine MRI “showed minimal

11 degenerative changes,” and “there [wa]s no indication that she

12 underwent further treatment outside of oral pain medications.”

13 (Id.)

14 Explaining that “there [wa]s little doubt that [Plaintiff]

15 experience[d] pain and discomfort due to fibromyalgia,” the ALJ

16 concluded that “the objective medical evidence d[id] not support

17 the alleged severity of symptoms.” (Id.) He found that she had

18 not been “deprived of the ability to perform work” consistent

19 with the RFC “for any 12-month period since the alleged onset

20 date.” (Id.)

21 3. Analysis

22 The ALJ failed to properly analyze Plaintiff’s subjective

23 symptoms, discounting her testimony and statements based on “an

24 apparent fundamental misunderstanding of fibromyalgia.” Revels

25 v. Berryhill, 874 F.3d 648, 662 (9th Cir. 2017) (collecting cases

26 showing “recurrent problem” of ALJs failing “to properly analyze

27 . . . fibromyalgia-related symptoms”). The ALJ discounted

28 Plaintiff’s testimony because she “complained of worsened

1 fibromyalgia pain [in 2016 and 2017], but her physical

2 examination findings remained largely unremarkable except for

3 tenderness to palpation of trigger points and neck and back pain

4 with limited range of motion of the spine.” (AR 104.) But there

5 are no laboratory tests to confirm the presence or severity of

6 fibromyalgia, which is “diagnosed entirely on the basis of

7 patients’ reports of pain and other symptoms.” Benecke v.

8 Barnhart, 379 F.3d 587, 590 (9th Cir. 2004). Indeed, “[o]ne of

9 the most striking aspects of this disease is the absence of

10 symptoms that a lay person may ordinarily associate with joint

11 and muscle pain.” Rollins v. Massanari, 261 F.3d 853, 863 (9th

12 Cir. 2001) (Ferguson, J., dissenting); see also Cota v. Comm’r of

13 Soc. Sec., No. 1:08-CV-00842-SMS, 2009 WL 900315, at *9 (E.D.

14 Cal. Mar. 31, 2009) (“Joints in fibromyalgia patients appear

15 normal; musculoskeletal examinations generally indicate no

16 objective joint swelling or abnormality in muscle strength,

17 sensory functions, or reflexes.”), judgment vacated on other

18 grounds by 2010 WL 289294 (E.D. Cal. Jan. 15, 2010).

19 The medical records show Plaintiff’s consistent complaints

20 of generalized muscle pain, tender points, fatigue, and sleep

21 problems, all of which are indicative of fibromyalgia. (See AR

22 201-03, 209-10, 216-17, 516-20, 521, 574-76, 590-93, 599, 651-52,

23 671-73, 674-78, 762, 767, 774, 778, 783); Benecke, 379 F.3d at

24 590 (noting common symptoms of fibromyalgia as “chronic pain

25 throughout the body, multiple tender points, fatigue, stiffness,

26 and a pattern of sleep disturbance that can exacerbate the cycle

27 of pain and fatigue associated with this disease”). Thus, the

28 lack of abnormal objective findings on examination was not a

1 sufficient basis for rejecting Plaintiff’s subjective symptom

2 statements in the face of her undisputed fibromyalgia diagnosis.

3 See generally Day v. Weinberger, 522 F.2d 1154, 1156 (9th Cir.

4 1975) (ALJ erred by relying upon “his own exploration and

5 assessment” of plaintiff’s medical condition rather than medical

6 evidence in record). The ALJ did not place in context the

7 evidence of Plaintiff’s multiple tender-trigger-point findings,

8 sleep disturbance, anxiety, depression, brain fog, fatigue, and

9 chronic, widespread pain lasting over three months. See SSR 12-

10 2p, 2012 WL 3104869 (July 25, 2012) (governing SSA’s

11 consideration of fibromyalgia);18 Revels, 874 F.3d at 656

12 (recognizing fibromyalgia “as a valid basis for a finding of

13 disability” when analyzed using SSR 12-2p criteria).

14 The ALJ also erred in rejecting Plaintiff’s testimony based

15 on her not having “under[gone] further treatment outside of oral

16 pain medications as previously advised,” amounting to “rather

17 conservative medical management” of her fibromyalgia. (AR 104.)

18 In fact, Plaintiff also received steroid injections. (See AR

19 684, 780); see, e.g., Revels, 874 F.3d at 667 (finding opioid

20 medications and steroid injections not conservative treatment for

21 fibromyalgia). Thus, her allegedly conservative treatment could

22 not support discounting her statements and testimony.

23 Because the ALJ analyzed the medical evidence using improper

24 criteria, his assessment of Plaintiff’s subjective symptom

25

18 One of the preconditions for a diagnosis of fibromyalgia

26

is that there be no other cause of the patient’s symptoms. See

27 SSR 12-2p, 2012 WL 3104869, at *3. Here, the ALJ found that

Plaintiff had no other severe impairments besides fibromyalgia

28 (AR 100); thus, it had to have been the cause of her pain and

other symptoms.

1 testimony was necessarily flawed. Remand is required.19

2 B. Remand for Further Proceedings Is Appropriate

3 When an ALJ errs, the Court “ordinarily must remand for

4 further proceedings.” Leon v. Berryhill, 880 F.3d 1041, 1045

5 (9th Cir. 2017) (as amended Jan. 25, 2018); see also Harman v.

6 Apfel, 211 F.3d 1172, 1175-78 (9th Cir. 2000) (as amended). The

7 Court has discretion to do so or to award benefits under the

8 “credit as true” rule. Leon, 880 F.3d at 1044 (citation

9 omitted). “[A] direct award of benefits was intended as a rare

10 and prophylactic exception to the ordinary remand rule[.]” Id.

11 at 1045. The “decision of whether to remand for further

12 proceedings turns upon the likely utility of such proceedings,”

13 Harman, 211 F.3d at 1179, and when an “ALJ makes a legal error,

14 but the record is uncertain and ambiguous, the proper approach is

15 to remand the case to the agency,” Leon, 880 F.3d at 1045 (citing

16 Treichler, 775 F.3d at 1105).

17 Here, further administrative proceedings would serve the

18 useful purpose of allowing the ALJ to give proper consideration

19 to Plaintiff’s fibromyalgia diagnosis and subjective symptom

20 testimony. But although the ALJ did not expressly say so, some

21 specific portions of Plaintiff’s testimony did seem exaggerated:

22 it’s hard to imagine that she could function at all, much less

23 occasionally grocery shop, cook, clean, and do other household

24 chores, if she truly got at most an hour of sleep a night and was

25

19 Even assuming the ALJ did not err in finding that the

26

side effects Plaintiff complained of at the hearing were not

27 documented in the records, that alone would not justify

discounting her statements and testimony, particularly in light

28 of the flaws in the other two proffered reasons. After all, the

side effects could simply have increased with time.

1} almost never without a genuine migraine headache.’ (AR 120-21.)

2||Moreover, inconsistencies exist in the record concerning whether

3 took care of her husband or he of her. (Compare AR 65-66,

4 || with AR 398.) It’s hard to reconcile her statements about

5 needing to lie down for “hours and hours” every day and being

6] essentially nonfunctional (AR 128, 397-405) with caring for a

7 || disabled husband and his parents (AR 65-66). When a court has

8} “serious doubt” about whether a plaintiff is disabled, remand for

9} further proceedings is appropriate. See Treichler, 775 F.3d at

10 1107. If the ALJ chooses to again discount Plaintiff’s

11 |} subjective symptoms on remand, he can then provide an adequate

12 | discussion of the reasons why. See Payan v. Colvin, 672 F. App’x

13 732, 733 (9th Cir. 2016).

14 || VI. CONCLUSION

15 Consistent with the foregoing and under sentence four of 42

16]/U.S.c. § 405(g),*' IT IS ORDERED that judgment be entered

17 || REVERSING the Commissioner’s decision, GRANTING Plaintiff’s

18 | request for remand, and REMANDING this action for further

19 |} proceedings consistent with this memorandum decision.

20 Uf,

21 |) DATED: March 26, 2021

JEAN ROSENBLUTH

22 U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE

23

24 °° Plaintiff had a sleep study in June 2015 and was found to

25 have “mild” sleep apnea caused at least in part by her obesity.

(AR 598-99.)

26 21 : : :

That sentence provides: “The [district] court shall have

27 || power to enter, upon the pleadings and transcript of the record,

a judgment affirming, modifying, or reversing the decision of the

28 Commissioner of Social Security, with or without remanding the

cause for a rehearing.”

21

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.