ANDERSON v. COMMISSIONER SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION (2020)

[Unpublished]

Sheila Anderson appeals a judgment of the district court ^* upholding a decision of the Commissioner of Social Security that denied Anderson’s applications for disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income. Anderson argues that the administrative law judge who rendered the decision for the agency ignored evidence of Anderson’s disability, failed to give appropriate weight to the opinions of Anderson’s medical providers, mischaracterized opinions of independent medical examiners who evaluated her workers compensation claim, and propounded a flawed hypothetical question to a vocational expert about Anderson’s functional limitations.

The district court filed a twenty-nine page decision that thoroughly addressed the contentions that Anderson raised. The court determined that substantial evidence supported the ALJ’s finding that Anderson’s claimed limitation in walking, sitting, and standing were not supported by objective medical evidence, that the ALJ did not err in evaluating the opinions of thirteen treating providers and independent medical examiners whom the court discussed individually, and that the ALJ’s hypothetical question to the vocational expert was properly based on all of the impairments that the ALJ found to be true and supported by substantial evidence.

We conclude that the district court correctly rejected Anderson’s numerous challenges to the agency’s decision, and that there is no need to augment the district court’s lengthy explanation and analysis. Any arguments raised for the first time on appeal are waived. The judgment of the district court is affirmed. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

FOOTNOTES

FOOTNOTE.   The Honorable Hildy Bowbeer, United States Magistrate Judge for the District of Minnesota, to whom the case was referred for final disposition by consent of the parties under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c).

PER CURIAM.