The Court decided three Social Security cases in August. Unfortunately, its deferential trend continued and all were affirmations:

Diaz v. Kijakazi (affirmed, unpublished)

Judges Sykes, Rovner, and Wood
August 16, 2023

Diaz’s 2006 SSI claim based on bipolar disorder was the subject of six ALJ hearings and several remands, including at least one from district court. She was eventually approved with an onset date in 2016, but 10 years of benefits remained at issue. Along the way, a consultative psychologist opined that Diaz has a markedly restricted ability to interact appropriately with coworkers and supervisors and seems to be intolerant of routine stress but capable of adapting to changes. The latest ALJ rejected the opinions about stress intolerance and interaction limitations.

The ALJ cited non-mental health providers’ exam observations, did not defer to the CE as an examining physician, and relied on findings about judgment and appearance to reject Diaz’ stress intolerance. The Court said “the question is close” but affirmed. And it was sufficient for the ALJ to reject the interaction limitations where Diaz interacted appropriately with her doctors, declined anger management, and improved with medication. The Court also believed the ALJ accounted for the difference between cooperating with a doctor and cooperating at work by limiting Diaz to occasional workplace interactions. While the ALJ cited other grounds that were insufficient, including that the opinion depends on Diaz’ subjective statements, the Court affirmed “even though ‘reasonable minds’ might have reached a different outcome.”

Buttles v. Kijakazi (affirmed, unpublished)

Judges Wood, Hamilton, and Kirsch
August 15, 2023

Nine years before applying for DIB, a heavy crate of cucumbers fell on Buttles while she was working at a grocery store. After undergoing surgery to remove a portion of her collar bone, trying various other treatments, and attempting a new job, Buttles sought DIB due to serious restrictions using her arms and difficulty concentrating. After a series of two applications, three ALJ hearings, and one district court remand, the Seventh Circuit declined to give Buttles “one more chance to make her case” after an ALJ failed to discuss one doctor’s report.

Five years after Buttles’ date last insured, an examining neuropsychologist opined that she has ADHD, learning problems, depression, and anxiety; that her condition deteriorated over the previous five years; and that overall she is “very very limited,” likely unable to work, and disability benefits would be appropriate. The ALJ did not consider this examination at all, but the Court affirmed because the ALJ otherwise “relied on treatment notes” and one psychiatrist’s exam prior to the DLI. Regarding physical restrictions, it was sufficient that the ALJ “discussed” and “justified” her evaluation of the evidence.

Case v. Kijakazi (affirmed, unpublished)

Judges Ripple, St. Eve, and Pryor
August 1, 2023

In response to a hypothetical question reflecting Case’s RFC, a vocational expert identified three DOT codes comprising estimates of nearly 500,000 jobs. On cross examination, the VE testified to use of “SkillTRAN numbers” that allocate job estimates from Standard Occupational Codes (SOC) to each DOT title, but could not describe the allocation factors or formulas used by SkillTRAN. The ALJ inquired further, and the VE explained that he relied on SkillTRAN to estimate the availability of jobs in the national economy based on government survey data, described his analysis “in very broad strokes,” and explained that he relied on four decades of research and job counseling experience and observations to determine that the SkillTRAN estimates seemed reasonable.

“The inability of the vocational expert to precisely explain the software’s algorithms does not render his explanation unreliable.” The Court agreed that the VE could have explained SkillTRAN’s methodology more clearly and that the ALJ could have pushed “for more specific, responsive answers.” But the ALJ posed some inquiries before relying on the VE’s testimony and it was permissible for the ALJ to find the VE’s use of SkillTRAN and his prior experience produced sufficiently reliable estimates.