United States District Court, D. Colorado
ORDER
LEWIS
T. BABCOCK, JUDGE
Plaintiff
Scott Tyler Jones appeals from the Social Security
Administration (“SSA”) Commissioner's final
decision denying his application for disability insurance
benefits, filed pursuant to Title II of the Social Security
Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 401-433. Jurisdiction is proper
under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). Oral argument would not
materially assist me in the determination of this appeal.
After
consideration of the parties' briefs, as well as the
administrative record, I AFFIRM the Commissioner's final
order.
I.
Statement of the Case
Plaintiff
is a 49 year-old man with a master's degree in counseling
and an associate's degree in applied electronic
technology. [Administrative Record (“AR”) 66,
262, 319] He seeks judicial review of SSA's decision
denying his application for disability insurance benefits.
Pl.'s Br., ECF No. 13 at 5. Plaintiff filed his
application in July 2015 alleging that his disability began
in August 2014. [AR 262]
The
application was initially denied on November 5, 2015. [AR
138] After Plaintiff's request for review, the
Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) conducted an
evidentiary hearing and issued a written ruling on July 5,
2016. [AR 62-100, 116- 28, 144] In that ruling, the ALJ
denied Plaintiff's application on the basis that he was
not disabled because, considering his age, education, and
work experience, he had acquired skills from past relevant
work that were transferrable to jobs that existed in
significant numbers in the national economy. [AR 127] After a
request to review this decision from Plaintiff, the SSA
Appeals Council remanded the case back to the ALJ. [AR
132-35] The ALJ held another hearing and issued a written
ruling on April 5, 2017. [AR 9-23, 32-58] The ALJ again found
that there are jobs that exist in significant numbers in the
national economy that Plaintiff could perform. [AR 22]
The SSA
Appeals Council subsequently denied Plaintiff's
administrative request for review of the ALJ's
determination, making SSA's denial final for the purpose
of judicial review. [AR 1-3]; see 20 C.F.R.
§404.981. Plaintiff timely filed his Complaint with this
court seeking review of SSA's final decision. ECF No. 1.
II.
Relevant Medical History
Plaintiff's
claims on appeal relate to his mental health. In September
2013, Plaintiff, living in Arizona, saw Sami Victor, M.D. for
a mental health follow up. [AR 522] Dr. Victor explained that
Plaintiff had a “past psychiatric history of [traumatic
brain injury], mood disorder and anxiety . . . .”
[Id.] His current problem list included bipolar
disorder. [AR 523] Plaintiff had an unremarkable mental
status exam, with Dr. Victor noting that Plaintiff: appeared
appropriately dressed; was awake and alert, cooperative, and
euthymic; had appropriate affect, speech, thought content,
thought process, perception, orientation, memory, and had no
judgment impairment. [AR 522-23] Plaintiff denied anxiety and
had an improved mood with no stressors noted. [AR 522]
Plaintiff was instructed to continue a medication regime that
included Cymbalta and Lamictal. [AR 523]
A month
later, Plaintiff presented to Timothy Baker, M.D. as
depressed, tired, and lacking motivation. [AR 598] Four days
later, Plaintiff saw Dr. Victor who noted an unremarkable
mental status exam. [AR 525-27] A few weeks later, Plaintiff
reported to Dr. Victor increased anxiety and appeared
anxious, but otherwise had an unremarkable mental status
exam. [AR 528-29] Dr. Victor prescribed Klonopin and added an
anxiety disorder to Plaintiff's current problem list. [AR
529-30] Dr. Baker noted Plaintiff was doing better in a
follow up after his appointment with Dr. Victor. [AR 593-94]
Dr.
Victor did not note anything remarkable in the next
appointments in November 2013 and February, June, and
September 2014. [AR 532-45] In the September appointment, Dr.
Victor noted that Plaintiff lost his job three days prior.
[AR 542] In January 2015, Dr. Victor noted that Plaintiff had
bouts of anxiety, but was doing well on his medication
regimen. [AR 546]
In May,
Plaintiff's wife was present with Plaintiff at his
appointment with Dr. Victor. [AR 552] His wife reported that
Plaintiff had slight paranoid delusions regarding the
September 11 attacks and the illuminati. [Id.] Dr.
Victor increased Plaintiff's dosage of Lamictal and added
Seroquel to stabilize his mood. [Id.] Dr. Victor
noted that Plaintiff was irritable and had paranoid ideation,
but otherwise had an unremarkable mental status exam. [AR
554] A few weeks later, Plaintiff returned with his wife and
Dr. Victor noted “drastic improvement” with the
increased medication and “[l]ess discussion about
delusions.” [AR 559] Dr. Victor added insomnia to
Plaintiff's problem list and noted Plaintiff would begin
seeing a therapist. [AR 559-60]
In
June, Plaintiff's mental state had degraded as Dr. Victor
wrote that Plaintiff had “[c]ontinued delusional
thought disorder[, ] reported that I was trying to trick him
into taking more medications and that I was fooled by them
(illuminati).” [AR 565] Dr. Victor continued that it
was “[u]nknown if patient is adherent to his
medications” and Plaintiff would not allow his wife to
administer them. [Id.] Dr. Victor noted paranoid
ideation and paranoid delusion. [AR 568]
Soon
after, Plaintiff was involuntarily taken to a mental
hospital. [AR 408, 412] Plaintiff's wife indicated that
Plaintiff had threatened suicide in front of their children;
had been forcing his children to watch conspiracy videos; had
been physical with her and their children; threatened her;
believed he saw a ghost in the house; and that she was
concerned for her and their children's safety and had
been speaking to a divorce lawyer. [AR 412] Plaintiff was
nonresponsive and uncooperative with staff. [AR 411-22]
Plaintiff was hospitalized for 12 days. [AR 482]
Dennis
Michael Hughes, M.D. performed Plaintiff's psychiatric
discharge summary. [AR 482-90] Dr. Hughes noted that
Plaintiff's dose of Seroquel was significantly increased,
to which Plaintiff responded well “with resolution of
psychotic symptoms and significant reduction of manic
symptoms within a few days.” [AR 482] In his interview,
Plaintiff presented as pleasant, cooperative, verbose,
circumstantial, and over inclusive and was “near his
psychiatric baseline, with no overt manic or psychotic
symptoms noted currently.” [AR 482-83] The doctor noted
that Plaintiff's wife had filed for an order of
protection and Plaintiff would be discharged under the care
of his mother, brother, and sister-in-law in Colorado. [AR
482-83, 490]
In
July, Plaintiff saw Dana Jean Lahaie, MD in Arizona. Dr.
Lahaie noted Plaintiff's constricted affect,
circumstantial speech, and anxious mood, but otherwise noted
Plaintiff's casual appearance, good concentration, denial
of delusions and hallucinations, appropriate orientation,
fair insight, and fair judgment. [AR 452] She recommended
Plaintiff stay on his medication regimen and that he find
mental health care in Colorado. [AR 453]
In
August, Plaintiff saw Dr. Baker to get refills for medication
and for a referral to a new primary doctor in Colorado.
Plaintiff noted that he felt “like things are
stable” and Dr. Baker noted an unremarkable
psychological exam. [AR 578-79] A few weeks later, Plaintiff
saw Mitchell J. Janasek, M.D. for a preventative exam, where
Dr. Janasek referred Plaintiff to a psychiatrist and noted
that Plaintiff had a normal psychiatric exam with appropriate
mood and affect. [AR 671-75]
In
October, Plaintiff had a consultative exam performed by David
A. Fohrman, M.D. [AR 683] Plaintiff noted his level of
depression over the last two weeks was an eight and anxiety a
nine on a scale of ten. [Id.] This was related to
his pending divorce and his lack of a job and a home.
[Id.] He noted that he had recent manic episodes and
he saw a “shimmering curtain” at night due to him
taking Seroquel. [AR 684] He stated he was not as focused on
conspiracy theories as before his hospitalization and that he
enjoyed bike riding and working on the model rocket kit his
brother purchased for him. [Id.] He felt his
medication had helped him “for the most part.”
[Id.]
Dr.
Fohrman wrote that Plaintiff “was alert and oriented
times four. He was overall cooperative for the examination.
His mood was subdued, congruent. He had no evidence of audio
or visual hallucinations.” [AR 686] Plaintiff knew his
Social Security number, could recall three of three unrelated
words immediately and two of three in five minutes, could
spell “world” backwards, and responded
appropriately to questions regarding his fund of general
information. [Id.] Plaintiff had issues performing
“serial sevens” where he was to count back from
100 by seven. [Id.] Under a section titled
“abstract thinking”, Dr. Fohrman wrote that
Plaintiff “thought the similarity [between] the words
apples and bananas was they are both ...