GILBY v. COMMISSIONER SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION (2019)

[Unpublished]

Kaila F. Gilby appeals from the order of the District Court ¹ affirming the decision of an administrative law judge (ALJ) denying disability insurance benefits. Gilby contends that the ALJ erred in his credibility determination, improperly discounted her subjective claims of pain, and failed to develop the record regarding her residual functional capacity (RFC). After de novo review, we conclude that the ALJ’s decision is supported by substantial evidence on the record as a whole. See Chaney v. Colvin, 812 F.3d 672, 676 (8th Cir. 2016) (standard of review). We further conclude that the ALJ’s credibility findings are entitled to deference. See Casey v. Astrue, 503 F.3d 687, 696 (8th Cir. 2007) (explaining that if an ALJ’s credibility determination is supported by substantial evidence, it is entitled to deference). And “[w]hile an ALJ does have a duty to develop the record, this duty is not never-ending․ The ALJ is required to order medical examinations and tests only if the medical records presented to him do not give sufficient medical evidence to determine whether the claimant is disabled.” McCoy v. Astrue, 648 F.3d 605, 612 (8th Cir. 2011). Because the medical evidence in the record constituted sufficient evidence of Gilby’s RFC, the ALJ was not required to further develop the record before him.

We affirm the judgment.

FOOTNOTES

1.   The Honorable Erin L. Wiedemann, United States Magistrate Judge for the Western District of Arkansas, by consent of the parties.

PER CURIAM.