Wendy Grant v. Carolyn Colvin
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Wendy Grant appeals the district court’s summary judgment order affirming ' the Commissioner of Social Security’s denial of her application for supplemental security income under Title XVI of the Social Security Act. 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.
Grant, contends that the ALJ improperly rejected the opinion of her treating medical provider, physician’s assistant Rogelio Cantu, in assessing her physical limitations and improperly discounted the opinion evidence of Frank Rosekrans, Ph.D., regarding her mental health impairments.
The ALJ provided germane reasons, supported by the record, for giving little weight to Cantu’s opinion regarding Grant’s physical limitations. See id." at 1111 (stating that an ALJ may discount the opinion of a physician’s assistant if the ALJ provides germane reasons for doing so); Bayliss v. Barnhart, 427 F.3d 1211, 1218 (9th Cir.2005) (recognizing that incon sistency with medical evidence is…