Opinion
Case No. CV 15-03948 JGB (AFM)
07-29-2016
JACQUELYN CASAREZ, Plaintiff, v. CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant.
ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
This matter came before the Court on the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge to whom the case was referred. Further, the Court has engaged in a de novo review of those portions of the Report to which objections have been made.
In Defendant's Objection, the Commissioner raises a number of arguments, most of which were previously briefed and addressed in the Report and Recommendation. One argument that merits some additional discussion deals with the ALJ's rejection of two treating providers' opinions (Dr. Douglas Schave and Julie Addison, therapist). The Commissioner asserts that the ALJ appropriately gave little weight to Dr. Schave's and Ms. Addison's opinions because they relied heavily on Plaintiff's subjective complaints of pain, which the ALJ had properly discredited. (Objection at 3-4, 6-7 (citing Morgan v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec. Admin., 169 F.3d 595, 602 (9th Cir. 1999) ("A physician's opinion of disability 'premised to a large extent upon the claimant's own accounts of his symptoms and limitations' may be disregarded where those complaints have been 'properly discounted.'")).) The record, however, does not support this broad assertion. There was evidence of Plaintiff's drug seeking behavior and inconsistencies in Plaintiff's statements regarding her activities, but the record shows that neither Dr. Schave nor Ms. Addison relied "uncritically" on Plaintiff's subjective complaints in forming their opinions. (AR 29.) Rather, they treated and examined Plaintiff on numerous occasions for more than two years and made detailed clinical findings to support their assessments. The ALJ failed to demonstrate how Dr. Schave's and Ms. Addison's opinions were based more heavily on Plaintiff's complaints than their own clinical observations. See Ryan v. Commissioner of Social Sec., 528 F.3d 1194, 1199 (9th Cir. 2008). The ALJ's conclusion that Dr. Schave's and Ms. Addison's opinions were predicated primarily on Plaintiff's subjective complaints thus improperly ignored Plaintiff's significant treatment history with these providers.
With this addition, the Court accepts the findings and recommendations of the Magistrate Judge. DATED: July 29, 2016
/s/_________
JESUS G. BERNAL
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE