Ramon Angulo, Jr. v. Carolyn W. Colvin

MEMORANDUM

Ramon Angulo appeals the district court’s judgment upholding the decision of the Commissioner of Social Security to deny him Supplemental Security Income benefits. We affirm the district court’s judgment.

Angulo argues that the ALJ relied improperly on evidence outside the closed disability period in finding that his statements about his symptoms were not entirely credible. Angulo’s testimony that he played racquetball and could do a week’s worth of grocery shopping at a time referred to his activities after the closed period, and therefore the ALJ should not have relied on it. The ALJ’s other- reasons for rejecting Angulo’s testimony were, however, “specific, clear, and convincing,” and based on a rational interpretation of the evidence. Lingenfelter v. As true, 504 F.3d 1028, 1036 (9th Cir.2007) (citations and internal quotation marks omitted); Burch v. Barnhart, 400 F.3d 676, 679 (9th Cir.2005). In particular, the ALJ could properly rely upon Angulo’s descriptions of his condition and activities beginning on October 25, 2006, which is when the period of Angulo’s claim began. Because the ALJ’s credibility determination was still supported by substantial evidence, it…