USCA1 Opinion

[NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
____________________

No. 97-1972

PAMELA PIPER,

Plaintiff, Appellant,

v.

SHIRLEY S. CHATER, COMMISSIONER,

SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION,

Defendant, Appellee.

____________________

APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

[Hon. Shane Devine, Senior U.S. District Judge]

__________________________

____________________

Before

Torruella, Chief Judge,

___________
Selya and Stahl, Circuit Judges.
______________

____________________

Jonathan P. Baird on brief for appellant.

_________________
Paul M. Gagnon,
________________

United

States

Attorney,

David L. Broderi
_________________

Assistant
Regional

United States
Counsel,

Attorney,

Social

Security

and

Wayne G. Lewis,
________________

Administration,

on

Assist
brief

appellee.

____________________

February 10, 1998

____________________

Per Curiam.
__________

Pamela Piper, who suffers from urinary

incontinence and other impairments, appeals from the district

court's

Social

judgment upholding the denial of her application for

Security

Security.

After

essentially for

opinion.

benefits

The

by

the

Commissioner

a careful review of the

the reasons

given in

of

Social

record, we affirm,

the district

following addresses only the

court's

most significant

issue raised by appellant.

Piper

objects

administrative law

judge

She contends that the ALJ

who

needed to

vocational

use the

expert

individual could

(VE)

to the

hypothetical

(ALJ) at

posed

her disability

by the

hearing.

erred in postulating an individual

bathroom

"at will."

originally testified

perform certain

sedentary and

Although

that

the

such an

light jobs,

the VE later clarified that the individual could not do so if

the bathroom trips were "frequent,"

more times per eight-hour work

lunch, or more than once

lunch.

an express finding

use of the

breaks and

ALJ used the ambiguous "at will"

Piper's limitations and did

on the critical question

bathroom was frequent.

921 F.2d 816,

or

day in addition to breaks and

per hour in addition to

In his opinion, the

language in describing

i.e., took place ten

822 (8th Cir. 1990)

-2-

See
___

not make

whether Piper's

Ellison v. Sullivan,
_______
________

(an ALJ may not

ignore a

"critical

assumption"

underlying

vocational

expert's

testimony).

Like the district

implicitly

court, we conclude that

the ALJ

and supportably determined that Piper did not use

the bathroom so frequently as to preclude employment.

on

her treatment

reported tendency

and

employment

to exaggerate

history,

activities

her symptoms,

the ALJ

Based

and

was

warranted in concluding that her need for bathroom breaks was

below the more

than one time

said would compromise

per hour figure

her ability to work.

which the

VE

It was the ALJ's

responsibility to determine issues of credibility and to draw

inferences from the

record evidence.

See Irlanda Ortiz

___ _____________

v.

Secretary of Health & Human Services, 955 F.2d 765, 769 (1st
_____________________________________

Cir.

1991) (given the

medical evidence,

claimant's

the ALJ did

complaints

alleged").

Affirmed.
_________

claimant's treatment history

were

not err in deciding

not

credible

"to

the

and the

that the

extent

-3-