Not for Publication in West's Federal Reporter
United States Court of Appeals
For the First Circuit
No. 18-1510
DEVYN ELLEN APPLEBEE,
Plaintiff, Appellant,
v.
NANCY A. BERRYHILL, Acting Commissioner,
Social Security Administration,
Defendant, Appellee.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MAINE
[Hon. Nancy Torresen, Chief U.S. District Judge]
Before
Lynch, Stahl, and Barron,
Circuit Judges.
Riley L. Fenner for appellant.
Halsey B. Frank, United States Attorney, Michael J. Pelgro,
Social Security Administration Regional Chief Counsel, and Molly
E. Carter, Special Assistant United States Attorney, on brief, for
appellee.
November 30, 2018
PER CURIAM. Appellant Devyn Ellen Applebee appeals from
a district court judgment affirming the Acting Commissioner of
Social Security's denial of her application for disability
benefits. An administrative law judge ("ALJ") found that, although
Applebee suffered from a variety of ailments, she retained
sufficient residual functional capacity to perform certain
sedentary work. Applebee contends that, in reaching that
conclusion, the ALJ erroneously assigned little or no weight to
Applebee's treating and examining sources and to Applebee's own
subjective testimony. After careful review, we affirm.
As we have stated repeatedly, the ALJ's findings shall
be conclusive if they are supported by substantial evidence, and
must be upheld "if a reasonable mind, reviewing the evidence in
the record as a whole, could accept it as adequate to support his
conclusion," even if the record could also justify a different
conclusion. Rodriguez v. Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., 647 F.2d
218, 222-23 (1st Cir. 1981) (citations omitted). In applying the
"substantial evidence" standard, we bear in mind that it is the
province of the ALJ, not the courts, to find facts, decide issues
of credibility, draw inferences from the record, and resolve
conflicts of evidence. See Irlanda Ortiz v. Sec'y of Health &
Human Servs., 955 F.2d 765, 769 (1st Cir. 1991) (per curiam)
(citing Rodriguez, 647 F.2d at 222).
- 2 -
In a detailed and well-reasoned opinion, the ALJ
identified substantial evidence to support his assignment of
little or no weight to Applebee's treating and examining sources.
Specifically, the ALJ found that those sources were inconsistent
with the bulk of Applebee's medical record, including extensive
physical and mental examination notes, laboratory and diagnostic
testing results, and with the opinions of three state agency
experts. Moreover, the ALJ permissibly discounted Applebee's
credibility in light of her previous failure to attend a disability
claims hearing, failure to follow a prescribed course of treatment,
infrequency of treatment, and paucity of mental health treatment
records.
While the record arguably could support a different
conclusion, there is clearly substantial evidence to support the
ALJ's findings. Accordingly, we uphold the ALJ's decision. See
Rodriguez Pagan v. Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., 819 F.2d 1, 3
(1st Cir. 1987) (per curiam).
Affirmed.
- 3 -