Daly

facts and discounting others, but this does not undermine the ALJ’s determinations

because “where evidence is susceptible to more than one rational interpretation, the

ALJ’s decision should be upheld.” Orn v. Astrue, 495 F.3d 625, 630 (9th Cir.

2007) (internal quotation omitted).

Nor did the ALJ improperly demand objective medical evidence to

substantiate Daly’s symptom testimony. The ALJ’s opinion reflected his correct

understanding that fibromyalgia can present “without objective correlation.” It was

permissible for the ALJ to note that Daly lacked objective medical evidence to

support many of her claims, because he offered additional legitimate reasons for

discounting her symptom testimony and did not rely on the lack of substantiating

objective evidence alone. See SSR 16-3P, 2017 WL 5180304 at *5 (Oct. 25, 2017);

Smartt v. Kijakazi, 53 F.4th 489, 498 (9th Cir. 2022).

2. Daly has forfeited the argument that her fibromyalgia in combination

with other impairments equals a listed impairment by failing to adequately raise it

before the district court. To show error in an ALJ’s Step Three finding, a claimant

bears the burden to “specify which listing she believes…