Shirley R. Camp v. Jo Anne Barnhart , 186 F. App'x 696 ( 2006 )


Menu:
  •                     United States Court of Appeals
    FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
    ___________
    No. 05-1490
    ___________
    Shirley R. Camp,                     *
    *
    Appellant,               *
    * Appeal from the United States
    v.                             * District Court for the
    * Eastern District of Arkansas.
    Jo Anne B. Barnhart, Commissioner,   *
    Social Security Administration,      * [UNPUBLISHED]
    *
    Appellee.                *
    ___________
    Submitted: June 23, 2006
    Filed: June 29, 2006
    ___________
    Before ARNOLD, BYE, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.
    ___________
    PER CURIAM.
    Shirley R. Camp appeals the district court’s1 order affirming the denial of
    disability insurance benefits. Camp alleged disability since January 2002 from
    multiple impairments, including arthritis, nerves, diabetes, seizures, and muscle
    spasms. After an April 2003 hearing, an administrative law judge (ALJ) determined
    that (1) certain of Camp’s alleged impairments were not severe, although some were
    1
    The Honorable Jerry W. Cavaneau, United States Magistrate Judge for the
    Eastern District of Arkansas, to whom the case was referred for final disposition by
    consent of the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c).
    medically determinable; (2) her diabetes and cervical degenerative disc disease with
    chronic pain were severe impairments alone or combined, but not of listing-level
    severity; (3) her allegations of limitations were not entirely credible; (4) her residual
    functional capacity for less than a full range of light work precluded her past relevant
    work; but (5) she could perform other jobs a vocational expert (VE) had identified in
    response to a hypothetical.
    Camp argues that the ALJ erred in determining that she did not suffer from
    severe depression and anxiety. We disagree, because, among other reasons, there was
    nothing in the record indicating Camp was referred to or sought care from a mental
    health professional, see Shannon v. Chater, 
    54 F.3d 484
    , 486 (8th Cir. 1995) (failure
    to seek treatment may be inconsistent with disability); as of Camp’s alleged onset
    date, there were no noted reports of anxiety or depressive symptoms, other than
    sleeping problems; and she herself told specialists she had a history of only mild
    anxiety and depression. See Nguyen v. Chater, 
    75 F.3d 429
    , 430-31 (8th Cir. 1996)
    (claimant bears burden of establishing severe impairment that significantly limits her
    physical or mental ability to do basic work activities).
    We also reject Camp’s challenges to the ALJ’s credibility findings and to the
    hypothetical. Contrary to Camp’s assertions, the ALJ gave multiple valid reasons--in
    addition to the lack of objective medical evidence--for finding her not entirely
    credible, see Guilliams v. Barnhart, 
    393 F.3d 798
    , 801 (8th Cir. 2005) (this court does
    not re-weigh evidence and defers to ALJ’s credibility determination so long as it is
    supported by good reasons and substantial evidence); and in the hypothetical the ALJ,
    as required, set forth impairments that he accepted as true and that were supported by
    substantial evidence, see Stormo v. Barnhart, 
    377 F.3d 801
    , 808-09 (8th Cir. 2004).
    Camp’s remaining arguments provide no basis for reversal. Accordingly, we
    affirm.
    ______________________________
    -2-