JOHN E. STEELE, District Judge.
This matter is before the Court on consideration of Magistrate Judge Carol Mirando's Report and Recommendation (Doc. #18), filed on August 1, 2014, recommending that the Commissioner's decision to deny social security disability benefits be affirmed. Plaintiff filed Objections (Doc. #19) on August 15, 2014, and the Commissioner filed a Response (Doc. #20) on August 28, 2014.
The Court reviews the Commissioner's decision to determine if it is supported by substantial evidence and based upon proper legal standards.
The Report and Recommendation finds that: (1) the ALJ's assessment that plaintiff had the residual functional capacity to perform medium work was supported by substantial evidence; (2) the ALJ did not err when he failed to consider any limitations caused by plaintiff's headaches or syncope spells in the assessment of plaintiff's residual functional capacity; and (3) the ALJ did not err by failing to explain how plaintiff's daily activities conflicted with his inability to work full time. After an independent review of the record, the Court agrees with the findings and recommendations in the Report and Recommendation as to the first and third issues, and therefore adopts the Report and Recommendation as to those issues.
The second issue requires more discussion. It is clear, as the Report and Recommendation states, that an ALJ must consider every impairment alleged, and must consider all allegations of physical and mental limitations or restrictions, not just those determined to be severe at Step Two, in assessing a claimant's residual functional capacity. (Doc. #18, p. 23.) Plaintiff asserts that the ALJ failed to consider his chronic headaches and recurring episodes of syncope (dizziness) in the residual functional capacity assessment. The Report and Recommendation states, without objection from plaintiff, that an ALJ is not required to consider or address conditions which are neither asserted in the disability application nor presented at the hearing before the ALJ. (Doc. #18, p. 24.) The rub, according to plaintiff, is that he
The Report and Recommendation stated that neither headaches nor syncope were stated as a cause of disability in the documents submitted in support of plaintiff's claim. (Doc. #18, p. 24.) Neither application prepared for plaintiff by the Social Security Administration on April 13, 2010, stated
A Pre-Hearing Memo from plaintiff's counsel to the ALJ listed headaches and a history of syncope among plaintiff's impairments. (Tr. 223.) At his administrative hearing before the ALJ, plaintiff testified that he suffered side effects from his medications, including dizziness, lightheadedness, and wooziness (Tr. 33; Doc. #18, p. 7), and that he had difficulty with his equilibrium or balance when walking on uneven surfaces. (Tr. 35.) This evidence is sufficient enough to require the ALJ to consider it in his residual functional capacity assessment. "[T]he ALJ has a duty to make a finding regarding whether the side effects of medications taken by a Social Security claimant render that claimant disabled."
The Court finds that the ALJ in this case did adequately consider plaintiff's headaches and syncope. The ALJ recognized his obligation to consider impairments which were not severe in assessing plaintiff's residual functional capacity. (Tr. 13.) The ALJ stated that he had considered "all symptoms" and the extent to which they could reasonably be accepted as consistent with objective medical evidence and other evidence. (Tr. 15.) The ALJ recognized both plaintiff's testimony and the existence of medical records relating to headaches and dizziness. (Tr. 16-18.) The ALJ found that plaintiff's alleged symptoms and limitations were overstated, and stated reasons for this finding. (Tr. 18.) In short, the Court finds that the ALJ considered plaintiff's pain from headaches and his dizziness in reaching his residual functional capacity assessment, and that the ALJ's assessment is supported by substantial evidence.
Accordingly, it is now
1. The Report and Recommendation (Doc. #14) is
2. The Decision of the Commissioner of Social Security is
3. The Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment accordingly and close the file.