Sandra Miller v. Carolyn Colvin
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Sandra L. Miller appeals the district court’s summary judgment affirming the Commissioner of Social Security’s decision denying her application for disability insurance benefits under Title II of the Social Security Act. Miller contends that the ALJ failed to properly consider the opinions of testifying medical expert Reuben Beezy, M.D., and of Nurse Practitioner Blaze Burnham that Miller would be limited to sedentary or less than sedentary work. Miller also contends that the ALJ failed to meet her burden to fully and fairly develop the record, where Miller represented herself at the hearing. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.
We review the district court’s order de novo. Molina v. Astrue, 674 F.3d 1104, 1110 (9th Cir.2012). We may set aside the denial of benefits only if it is not supported by substantial evidence or is based on legal error. Id.
Miller’s contention that the ALJ erred in finding that she was capable of light work and in discounting Dr. Beezy’s opinion that she was limited to sedentary work lacks merit. The ALJ reasonably found that Dr. Beezy did not give a well-supported basis for his opinion and that it was not supported by…