United States District Court, E.D. Arkansas, Eastern Division
following Recommended Disposition
(“Recommendation”) has been sent to Judge Billy
Roy Wilson. You may file written objections to all or part of
this Recommendation. If you do so, those objections must
specifically explain the factual or legal basis for your
objection. Objections must be received by the Clerk of this
Court within fourteen days of this Recommendation. By not
objecting, you may waive the right to appeal questions of
Jones applied for social security disability benefits on
April 30, 2013, alleging an onset date of November 13, 1995.
(R. at 55). A hearing was held, but Mr. Jones waived his
right to appear. (R. at 21). The administrative law judge
(ALJ) denied benefits, and the Appeals Council denied review.
(R. at 6). Mr. Jones then requested judicial review.
reasons stated below, the Commissioner's decision should
found that Mr. Jones had the following severe impairments:
depression, anxiety, history of polysubstance abuse, back
pain, personality disorders, paranoia, and seizures. (R. at
23). The ALJ determined that Mr. Jones had the residual
functional capacity (RFC) to perform light work, with the
ability to lift and carry 20 pounds occasionally and 10
pounds frequently. (R. at 24). In addition to exertional
limitations, the ALJ found non-exertional limitations: Mr.
Jones could perform simple, unskilled, or rote work; could
understand, follow, and remember concrete instructions;
should be limited to superficial contact with supervisors,
co-workers, and the public; and should not handle money, due
to a history of drug use and incarceration. (R. at 24). Mr.
Jones had no past relevant work. (R. at 29).
hearing testimony from a vocational expert (VE), the ALJ
found that Mr. Jones could perform jobs that existed in
sufficient numbers, including production assembly or poultry
deboner. (R. at 30).
Jones does not identify any specific error committed by the
ALJ. Instead, he argues generally that he is disabled due to
various conditions and recounts findings from the medical
records. The Commissioner contends that substantial evidence
on the record as a whole supports the ALJ's decision.
Court reviews the record to determine whether substantial
evidence supports the Commissioner's findings. Prosch
v. Apfel, 201 F.3d 1010, 1012 (8th Cir. 2000).
“Substantial evidence” means “enough that a
reasonable mind would find it adequate to support the
ALJ's decision.” Slusser v. Astrue, 557
F.3d 923, 925 (8th Cir. 2009) (citation omitted). The
Commissioner's decision is supported by ample evidence in
the record as a whole.
Jones presented to Helena Regional Medical Center's
Emergency Department on January 31, 2012, with complaints of
pain in multiple areas. (R. at 178). On examination, however,
he showed no evidence of trauma; and he had normal vital
signs and normal range of motion. (R. at 179). Mr. Jones was
discharged after a Toradol injection. (R. at 179-80).
O. Bailey, M.D., performed a physical examination of Mr.
Jones on June 12, 2013, and found only mild to moderate
limitations. (R. at 183-87). Dr. Bailey diagnosed
uncontrolled hypertension, type 2 diabetes mellitus, seizure
disorder, and paranoia/delusional disorder. (R. at 187). At
the examination, however, Mr. Jones had a blood pressure of
126/87 and normal range of motion. (R. at 184-85). The record
also contains no record of treatment for hypertension and
diabetes. Dr. Bailey's diagnoses, as observed by the ALJ,
seemed to be based on Mr. Jones's own statements. (R. at
Jones has had three mental diagnostic evaluations with
Charles Spellman, Ph.D. At the first, Mr. Jones claimed that
he did not know how to cook, make a sandwich, or pour a bowl
of cereal. (R. at 268). He stated that he quit school after
the seventh grade, had no children, and could not dress
himself. (R. at 268). Dr. Spellman ...