GAMMAGE v. COMMISSIONER SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION (2018)

[Unpublished]

Jamie Gammage appeals from the order of the District Court ¹ affirming the denial of disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income. After de novo review of the record and consideration of Gammage’s arguments for reversal, we conclude that substantial evidence on the record as a whole supports the decision. See Fentress v. Berryhill, 854 F.3d 1016, 1019–20 (8th Cir. 2017) (standard of review). Specifically, the finding by the administrative law judge (ALJ) that Gammage’s subjective complaints were not entirely credible is entitled to deference. See Vester v. Barnhart, 416 F.3d 886, 889 (8th Cir. 2005)(“[W]e defer to the ALJ’s determinations regarding the credibility of witnesses so long as such determinations are supported by good reasons and substantial evidence.”). Further, the ALJ’s determination on Gammage’s residual functional capacity (RFC) is supported by substantial evidence. See Mabry v. Colvin, 815 F.3d 386, 390 (8th Cir. 2016) (“The claimant has the burden to establish his RFC.”); Perkins v. Astrue, 648 F.3d 892, 897 (8th Cir. 2011) (recognizing that a treating physician’s opinion may be discounted and that the record as a whole must be evaluated). We affirm the judgment.

FOOTNOTES

1.   The Honorable Robert W. Pratt, United States District Judge for the Southern District of Iowa.

PER CURIAM.