Cynthia Brown v. Michael Astrue

MEMORANDUM

Cynthia Brown appeals the district court’s order denying her request to vacate the Social Security Administration’s decision that she is not eligible for disability benefits. We affirm.

We review district court decisions upholding the denial of benefits de novo. Floten v. Sec’y of Health and Human Servs., 44 F.3d 1453, 1457 (9th Cir.1995) (citing Matthews v. Shalala, 10 F.3d 678, 679 (9th Cir.1993)). However, we may overturn an Administrative Law Judge’s (“ALJ”) denial of benefits “ ‘only if it is not supported by substantial evidence or is based on legal error.’ ” Morgan v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec. Admin., 169 F.3d 595, 599 (9th Cir.1999) (quoting Magallanes v. Bowen, 881 F.2d 747, 750 (9th Cir.1989)). Substantial evidence means “such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion.” Id. It is “more than a mere scintilla but less than a preponderance.” Bayliss v. Barnhart, 427 F.3d 1211 , 1214 n. 1 (9th Cir.2005) (quotations omitted). Thus, we must uphold the ALJ even when “evidence exists to support more than one rational interpretation,” as long as the ALJ’s interpretation is “supported by inferences reasonably drawn from the…