Wilson v. Social Security Administration

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS NORTHERN DIVISION

DAVID WILSON PLAINTIFF

V. No. 3:19-cv-129-DPM

ANDREW SAUL’, Commissioner, Social Security Administration DEFENDANT

ORDER On de novo review, the Court adopts the recommendation, Doc. 13, and overrules Wilson’s objections, Doc. 14. FED. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3). Wilson says the ALJ failed to follow Social Security Ruling 14-1p. But that ruling mostly concerns whether chronic fatigue syndrome can be a medically determinable impairment; the ALJ found that to be the case for Wilson. As for whether chronic fatigue syndrome can be a disability, the ruling says ALJs should use the same process they use for all impairments. 79 Fed. Reg. 18750, 18754 (3 April 2014). The ALJ used that process, and she accounted for Wilson’s condition. Pirtle v. Astrue, 479 F.3d 931, 935 (8th Cir. 2007). As for Dr. Coon’s medical source statement, the ALJ adequately explained why she discounted it. In the ALJ’s view, Dr. Coon’s statement is inconsistent

“The Court directs the Clerk to update the docket to reflect that Andrew Saul is now the Commissioner.

with his prior examination findings; and the statement uncritically accepts as true most of Wilson’s subjective complaints. Casey v. Astrue, 503 F.3d 687, 692-94 (8th Cir. 2007). Last, the ALJ adequately explained why those complaints were inconsistent with the record as a whole: by pointing to Wilson’s examination findings, his daily activities, and his receipt of unemployment insurance benefits. Substantial evidence on the record as a whole supports the AL]’s decision; and the Court sees no error of law. Wright v. Colvin, 789 F.3d 847, 852 (8th Cir. 2015). The Court will therefore dismiss Wilson’s complaint with prejudice. So Ordered.

OPY4rstol D.P. Marshall jr. United States District Judge _ AS Apr porno

_2-