USCA11 Case: 20-13992 Date Filed: 08/06/2021 Page: 1 of 6
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT ________________________
No. 20-13992 Non-Argument Calendar ________________________
D.C. Docket No. 1:19-cv-23842-JAL
JOHN ANTHONY COLWELL,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,
Defendant-Appellee.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida ________________________
(August 6, 2021)
Before WILLIAM PRYOR, Chief Judge, JORDAN and GRANT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
John Anthony Colwell appeals the summary judgment in favor of the USCA11 Case: 20-13992 Date Filed: 08/06/2021 Page: 2 of 6
Commissioner of the Social Security Administration and against Colwell’s claim
for supplemental security income. 42 U.S.C. §§ 1383(c)(3), 405(g). Colwell argues
that the administrative law judge failed to fairly assess the evidence by neglecting
to assign a weight to the opinions of five treating physicians and giving significant
weight to the opinion of Dr. Marvin Bittinger, a medical consultant. Colwell also
challenges the finding that he had the residual functional capacity to perform light
work and the decision to discredit his testimony about his symptoms and
limitations. We affirm.
Even if the administrative law judge erred by failing to assign a weight to
the opinions of five physicians who treated Colwell’s ankle and spinal injuries, that
error was harmless because their medical records supported the determination that
injuries to Colwell’s ankle and back and his obesity were not disabling. See Diorio
v. Heckler, 721 F.2d 726, 728 (11th Cir. 1983). Dr. Hugh Unger treated Colwell
for a sprained left ankle and recorded that he improved markedly after physical
therapy. Afterwards, Dr. David Bell examined Colwell’s ankle and recorded that
he had full strength in all four muscle groups and a normal range of motion in his
ankle and that he had no focal motor or sensory deficits in his lower extremities.
And after Colwell fell and required surgery on his ankle, Dr. Bell recorded that
Colwell’s condition was improving steadily and that he had traveled internationally
without difficulty. Dr. David Robbins treated Colwell for back pain and recorded
2 USCA11 Case: 20-13992 Date Filed: 08/06/2021 Page: 3 of 6
that, although he had tenderness and a decreased range of motion in his neck, he
had normal muscle tone and bulk with full strength in all muscle groups and that
his deep tendon reflexes, lower extremity coordination, and gait were normal. Dr.
Neil Brown, despite classifying Colwell as morbidly obese at a weight of 250
pounds and recommending that he undergo lumbar surgery, reported that he had
full strength in all muscle groups except a minor weakness when grasping with his
left hand, that his gait and station were normal, and that he could walk without
difficulty on his heels and toes. Later, Dr. David Leizman examined Colwell and
found that he had tenderness and a mildly decreased range of motion in his spine,
but that he had no misalignment, asymmetry, crepitation, or defects and that he had
normal sensation and motor strength in his upper extremities. The treating
physicians’ records supported the administrative law judge’s finding that Colwell’s
conditions were not disabling.
Substantial evidence supported the administrative law judge’s decision to
give significant weight to Dr. Bittinger’s opinion that Colwell could perform light
work. As a “State agency medical . . . consultant[, Dr. Bittinger could be regarded]
[as] highly qualified and [an] expert[] in Social Security disability evaluation.” 20
C.F.R. § 416.913a(b)(1). Dr. Bittinger based his opinion on all evidence available,
which included Colwell’s medical records from his five treating physicians, the
Homestead Hospital Emergency Department, the Jackson South Community
3 USCA11 Case: 20-13992 Date Filed: 08/06/2021 Page: 4 of 6
Hospital, and the St. Lucie Medical Center. See id. §§ 416.913a(a)(1), 404.1527(e),
404.1513a. And Dr. Bittinger’s opinion was consistent with the findings of the five
physicians and hospitalists that Colwell had symptoms from impairments that
limited what type of jobs he could perform but did not prevent him from working.
A physician at Homestead Hospital who treated Colwell’s ankle recorded it had
tenderness and mild swelling yet could bear weight to walk. And like the
physicians who treated Colwell for back pain, doctors in the emergency rooms
during his five trips to Homestead Hospital and his five trips to Jackson South
Hospital recorded that Colwell had tenderness, mildly deceased range of motion,
and disc herniation, but he had normal strength, sensation, reflexes, and gait. And a
doctor in the emergency room of St. Lucie Medical Center who treated Colwell
after a car accident recorded that he had tenderness in his neck and back and disc
narrowing at L4-5, yet he had a full range of motion, equal reflexes, a normal gait,
and no weakness, numbness, or motor or sensory deficits. That evidence was
consistent with Dr. Bittinger’s opinion that Colwell could perform work that
required him to lift and carry 20 pounds occasionally and 10 pounds frequently;
stand, walk, and sit six hours a day; frequently balance, kneel, and crouch;
occasionally stoop, crawl, and climb ramps and stairs; and never climb ladders,
ropes, or scaffolds.
Substantial evidence also supported the finding that Colwell had the residual
4 USCA11 Case: 20-13992 Date Filed: 08/06/2021 Page: 5 of 6
functional capacity to perform some light work. The administrative law judge
accounted for Colwell’s impairments of inflammation and arthritis in his left ankle,
of degenerative disc disease, and of obesity that were supported by objective
medical evidence, credited his testimony about his symptoms, and discounted his
testimony about the extent of his functional limitations. Colwell’s medical records
contained no work-related limitations. But the administrative law judge reasonably
determined that Colwell had the ability to perform light work from the diagnoses
and treatments provided by his physicians and their reports that Colwell’s ankle
was improving post-surgery, that Colwell had maintained normal muscle strength,
range of motion, coordination, and gait despite his back impairment, and that he
could control his pain with medication and exercise. The administrative law judge
gave “significant weight” to Dr. Bittinger’s opinion regarding Colwell’s
“exertional limitations.” But based on medical records that Dr. Bell and hospitalists
prepared after Dr. Bittinger’s report, the administrative law judge gave “partial
weight” to Dr. Bittinger’s postural and environmental limitations, found that
Colwell’s limitations were not as severe as he asserted, and adjusted his range of
work to exclude him from operating foot controls with his left foot and to reduce
the frequency that he could kneel and crouch.
The administrative law judge was entitled to discredit Colwell’s testimony
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
USCA11 Case: 20-13992 Date Filed: 08/06/2021 Page: 1 of 6
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT ________________________
No. 20-13992 Non-Argument Calendar ________________________
D.C. Docket No. 1:19-cv-23842-JAL
JOHN ANTHONY COLWELL,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,
Defendant-Appellee.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida ________________________
(August 6, 2021)
Before WILLIAM PRYOR, Chief Judge, JORDAN and GRANT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
John Anthony Colwell appeals the summary judgment in favor of the USCA11 Case: 20-13992 Date Filed: 08/06/2021 Page: 2 of 6
Commissioner of the Social Security Administration and against Colwell’s claim
for supplemental security income. 42 U.S.C. §§ 1383(c)(3), 405(g). Colwell argues
that the administrative law judge failed to fairly assess the evidence by neglecting
to assign a weight to the opinions of five treating physicians and giving significant
weight to the opinion of Dr. Marvin Bittinger, a medical consultant. Colwell also
challenges the finding that he had the residual functional capacity to perform light
work and the decision to discredit his testimony about his symptoms and
limitations. We affirm.
Even if the administrative law judge erred by failing to assign a weight to
the opinions of five physicians who treated Colwell’s ankle and spinal injuries, that
error was harmless because their medical records supported the determination that
injuries to Colwell’s ankle and back and his obesity were not disabling. See Diorio
v. Heckler, 721 F.2d 726, 728 (11th Cir. 1983). Dr. Hugh Unger treated Colwell
for a sprained left ankle and recorded that he improved markedly after physical
therapy. Afterwards, Dr. David Bell examined Colwell’s ankle and recorded that
he had full strength in all four muscle groups and a normal range of motion in his
ankle and that he had no focal motor or sensory deficits in his lower extremities.
And after Colwell fell and required surgery on his ankle, Dr. Bell recorded that
Colwell’s condition was improving steadily and that he had traveled internationally
without difficulty. Dr. David Robbins treated Colwell for back pain and recorded
2 USCA11 Case: 20-13992 Date Filed: 08/06/2021 Page: 3 of 6
that, although he had tenderness and a decreased range of motion in his neck, he
had normal muscle tone and bulk with full strength in all muscle groups and that
his deep tendon reflexes, lower extremity coordination, and gait were normal. Dr.
Neil Brown, despite classifying Colwell as morbidly obese at a weight of 250
pounds and recommending that he undergo lumbar surgery, reported that he had
full strength in all muscle groups except a minor weakness when grasping with his
left hand, that his gait and station were normal, and that he could walk without
difficulty on his heels and toes. Later, Dr. David Leizman examined Colwell and
found that he had tenderness and a mildly decreased range of motion in his spine,
but that he had no misalignment, asymmetry, crepitation, or defects and that he had
normal sensation and motor strength in his upper extremities. The treating
physicians’ records supported the administrative law judge’s finding that Colwell’s
conditions were not disabling.
Substantial evidence supported the administrative law judge’s decision to
give significant weight to Dr. Bittinger’s opinion that Colwell could perform light
work. As a “State agency medical . . . consultant[, Dr. Bittinger could be regarded]
[as] highly qualified and [an] expert[] in Social Security disability evaluation.” 20
C.F.R. § 416.913a(b)(1). Dr. Bittinger based his opinion on all evidence available,
which included Colwell’s medical records from his five treating physicians, the
Homestead Hospital Emergency Department, the Jackson South Community
3 USCA11 Case: 20-13992 Date Filed: 08/06/2021 Page: 4 of 6
Hospital, and the St. Lucie Medical Center. See id. §§ 416.913a(a)(1), 404.1527(e),
404.1513a. And Dr. Bittinger’s opinion was consistent with the findings of the five
physicians and hospitalists that Colwell had symptoms from impairments that
limited what type of jobs he could perform but did not prevent him from working.
A physician at Homestead Hospital who treated Colwell’s ankle recorded it had
tenderness and mild swelling yet could bear weight to walk. And like the
physicians who treated Colwell for back pain, doctors in the emergency rooms
during his five trips to Homestead Hospital and his five trips to Jackson South
Hospital recorded that Colwell had tenderness, mildly deceased range of motion,
and disc herniation, but he had normal strength, sensation, reflexes, and gait. And a
doctor in the emergency room of St. Lucie Medical Center who treated Colwell
after a car accident recorded that he had tenderness in his neck and back and disc
narrowing at L4-5, yet he had a full range of motion, equal reflexes, a normal gait,
and no weakness, numbness, or motor or sensory deficits. That evidence was
consistent with Dr. Bittinger’s opinion that Colwell could perform work that
required him to lift and carry 20 pounds occasionally and 10 pounds frequently;
stand, walk, and sit six hours a day; frequently balance, kneel, and crouch;
occasionally stoop, crawl, and climb ramps and stairs; and never climb ladders,
ropes, or scaffolds.
Substantial evidence also supported the finding that Colwell had the residual
4 USCA11 Case: 20-13992 Date Filed: 08/06/2021 Page: 5 of 6
functional capacity to perform some light work. The administrative law judge
accounted for Colwell’s impairments of inflammation and arthritis in his left ankle,
of degenerative disc disease, and of obesity that were supported by objective
medical evidence, credited his testimony about his symptoms, and discounted his
testimony about the extent of his functional limitations. Colwell’s medical records
contained no work-related limitations. But the administrative law judge reasonably
determined that Colwell had the ability to perform light work from the diagnoses
and treatments provided by his physicians and their reports that Colwell’s ankle
was improving post-surgery, that Colwell had maintained normal muscle strength,
range of motion, coordination, and gait despite his back impairment, and that he
could control his pain with medication and exercise. The administrative law judge
gave “significant weight” to Dr. Bittinger’s opinion regarding Colwell’s
“exertional limitations.” But based on medical records that Dr. Bell and hospitalists
prepared after Dr. Bittinger’s report, the administrative law judge gave “partial
weight” to Dr. Bittinger’s postural and environmental limitations, found that
Colwell’s limitations were not as severe as he asserted, and adjusted his range of
work to exclude him from operating foot controls with his left foot and to reduce
the frequency that he could kneel and crouch.
The administrative law judge was entitled to discredit Colwell’s testimony
about the limiting effects of his pain and his impairments. Consistent with the
5 USCA11 Case: 20-13992 Date Filed: 08/06/2021 Page: 6 of 6
standard used to assess credibility, see Wilson v. Barnhart, 284 F.3d 1219, 1225
(11th Cir. 2002), the administrative law judge found that Colwell’s “medically
determinable impairments could reasonably be expected to cause the alleged
symptoms,” but his “statements concerning the intensity, persistence, and limiting
effects of these symptoms are not entirely consistent with the medical evidence and
other evidence in the record . . . .” Colwell’s testimony that he had to sit between
20 and 30 minutes before he could stand or move, that he could not stand in place
for more than ten seconds, that he laid down six to seven hours a day, and that he
could not work full-time or lift and carry more than five to ten pounds conflicted
with statements he made about his daily activities. Colwell alleged a disability
onset date of September 9, 2014, but he told Dr. Robbins in October 2014 that he
was working as a handyman and fruit picker and Dr. Bell in July 2015 that he was
working as a handyman. And Colwell told hospitalists in February 2016 that he
had lifted a heavy object, in July 2016 that he was working on a car, in October
2017 that he had “lift[ed] heavy weight,” and in August 2018 that he had lifted a
heavy couch. Colwell’s testimony also conflicted with his doctors’ medical
findings and his repeated statements to his treating physicians and to hospitalists
that the pain in his ankle and back improved when he complied with their
treatment plans.
We AFFIRM the summary judgment in favor of the Commissioner.