JUDICIAL REVIEW DECISION

CHARLES R. WOLLE, District Judge.

Plaintiff Adam Hessenflow alleges he is disabled. He seeks supplemental security income under Title XVI of the Social Security Act. The ALJ found plaintiff has the following severe impairments: paranoid schizophrenia and mood disorders. The ALJ concluded plaintiff retains the residual functional capacity to perform his past relevant work as a metal furniture assembler.

The court held a judicial review hearing by telephone conference call on February 3, 2016.

Plaintiff contends the ALJ erred in giving "little weight" to the opinion of Jennifer Zaichenko, P.A, the treating medical source. She noted that plaintiff "needs disability!!", that he had extreme limitations, and that his impairments would cause him to be absent from work more than four days per month. But the ALJ articulated (T. 18) valid reasons for discounting Ms. Zaichendo's assessment.

Plaintiff contends the ALJ erred in failing to engage in a drug abuse materiality assessment. But that assessment is required only if the ALJ initially finds plaintiff disabled. See Brueggemann v. Barnhart, 348 F.3d 689, 694 (8th Cir. 2003). The ALJ did not find plaintiff disabled, so the assessment was unnecessary.

This court has taken into account that in the record that both supports and detracts from the ALJ decision. See Pierce v. Bowen, 835 F.2d 190, 191 (8th Cir. 1987). On balance, substantial evidence in this record as a whole supports the ALJ's findings and the conclusion that plaintiff is not under a disability, as defined in the Act.

The court affirms the ALJ's determination that plaintiff is not entitled to supplemental security income (ssi) under Title XVI of the Social Security Act.

IT IS SO ORDERED.