Malia Baker v. Carolyn Colvin

MEMORANDUM

Malia Baker appeals the district court’s judgment affirming the Commissioner of Social Security’s denial of Baker’s application for Supplemental Security Income under Title XVI of the Social Security Act. Baker contends that the administrative law judge (“ALJ”) improperly relied on the opinion of testifying medical expert Dr. Veraldi over the opinions of examining sources Dr. Arnold and Dr. Cavanee. 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.

The ALJ found that Baker was under a disability, but that a substance abuse disorder was a contributing factor material to the determination of disability. At step five of the sequential analysis, the ALJ found that if Baker stopped her substance abuse, she could perform jobs that exist in significant numbers in the national economy.

Substantial evidence supports the ALJ’s analysis of the medical opinion evidence. Contrary to Baker’s contention, the ALJ did not reject the opinion of…