Daryl Allison v. Michael Astrue
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Daryl Allison appeals the district court’s order and judgment upholding the final decision by an administrative law judge (ALJ) that he was not disabled and therefore not entitled to Social Security disability benefits. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We affirm.
We review de novo a district court’s order affirming the ALJ’s denial of benefits. Lockwood v. Comm’r Social Sec. Admin., 616 F.3d 1068, 1071 (9th Cir.2010). The ALJ’s decision must be upheld if supported by substantial evidence and if the ALJ applied the correct legal standards. Howard ex rel. Wolff v. Barnhart, 341 F.3d 1006, 1011 (9th Cir.2003). Substantial evidence is “more than a scintilla but less than a preponderance; it is such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion.” Id. at 1011 (quoting Sandgathe v. Chater, 108 F.3d 978, 980 (9th Cir.1997)).
Allison first contends that the ALJ erred in declining to credit Dr. Williamson-Kirkland’s opinion that Allison was totally and permanently disabled due to the combined effects of his right shoulder condition and his cognitive limitations and avoidant and dependent personality traits. Allison…