June 1, 1993
[NOT FOR PUBLICATION]
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
____________________
No. 92-2308
RAFAEL RAMOS-SERRANO,
Plaintiff, Appellant,
v.
SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES,
Defendant, Appellee.
____________________
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO
[Hon. Raymond L. Acosta, U.S. District Judge]
___________________
____________________
Before
Breyer, Chief Judge,
___________
Torruella and Cyr, Circuit Judges.
______________
____________________
Raymond Rivera Esteves and Juan A. Hernandez Rivera on brief for
______________________ _________________________
appellant.
Daniel F. Lopez-Romo, United States Attorney, Jose Vazquez
______________________ _____________
Garcia, Assistant United States Attorney, and Jessie M. Klyce,
______ _________________
Assistant Regional Counsel, Region I, Department of Health and Human
Services, on brief for appellee.
____________________
____________________
Per Curiam. We have reviewed the parties' briefs and
__________
the record on appeal. We affirm the judgment of the district
court, dated October 1, 1992, essentially for the reasons
stated in the magistrate judge's report and recommendation,
dated July 28, 1992.
We need add only the following comments. Contrary to
the claimant's contention, the administrative law judge (ALJ)
did not fail to address the residual functional capacity
(RFC) report of Dr. Castrodad, dated October 30, 1985. At
the hearing on May 8, 1990, the ALJ pointed out that it was
contradicted by the testimony of the medical advisor (MA).
Furthermore, for the most part, that RFC appears based on the
subjective complaints of the claimant, as Dr. Castrodad's own
examination found only "tenderness along paravertebral
muscles" and, as to inability to do work, Dr. Castrodad's
only comment was that the claimant not do any work requiring
the handling of food. The RFC report of Dr. Cestero, dated
May 22, 1987, (well beyond the expiration of the claimant's
insured status, we add) was also properly rejected by ALJ as
based solely on claimant's own report of his history. Dr.
Cestero, herself, reported that her examination of claimant,
as well as the x-rays, were negative.
We also conclude that, even if as claimant contends, he
had recurring dizzy spells, the ALJ could properly rely on
theMA's determinationthat theywere notof adisabling severity.
Affirmed.
________