Kalyn Kelsey v. Michael Astrue

MEMORANDUM

On appeal, Kalyn Kelsey challenges the Administrative Law Judge’s (“ALJ”) findings that: (1) Kelsey’s mental impairments were not severe; and (2) Kelsey’s impairments did not prevent her from performing her past relevant work. We reject these arguments and affirm the district court.

1. Substantial evidence supports the ALJ’s reasons for finding that Kelsey’s mental impairments were not severe: (1) Dr. Mozer, after personally examining Kelsey, concluded that the claimant had only mild depression and anxiety that were not limiting; (2) Dr. Arpón testified that Kelsey’s thought processes were at least fair (if not better) throughout her treatment; (3) Dr. Kuka, Ph.D., though not a treating physician, testified that these impairments would not have a severely limiting effect on Kelsey; (4) Kelsey’s testimony that her prescription of Cymbalta (an anti-depressant) had improved her cognitive abilities; and (5) Kelsey had an “overall excellent performance [105] on an I.Q. test in August of 2007.”

2. Substantial evidence supports the ALJ’s finding that Kelsey’s impairments did not prevent her from performing her past relevant work. First, as to Kelsey’s claims of pain in her…