Wilhelm

Wilhelm v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration

Good Law
597 F. App'x 425
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 13, 201512-35253California493 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Carol Applebee Wilhelm appeals the district court’s order affirming the Commissioner of Social Security’s denial of her application for disability insurance benefits under Title II of the Social Security Act. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo, Molina v. Astrue, 674 F.3d 1104, 1110 (9th Cir.2012), and affirm.

Substantial evidence supports the Administrative Law Judge’s (ALJ) determination that Wilhelm’s foot condition was not a severe impairment. Considering the medical evidence, including the lack of any significant treatment records for Wilhelm’s foot after 2006, the ALJ reasonably inferred that Wilhelm’s foot impairment did not significantly limit her ability to do basic work activities. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520 (c); Molina, 674 F.3d at 1111 (“Even when the evidence is susceptible to more than one rational interpretation, we must uphold the ALJ’s findings if they are supported by inferences reasonably drawn from the record.”).

The ALJ provided specific and legitimate reasons supported by substantial evidence for discounting Dr. Jensen’s opinion that Wilhelm would be unable to work due to her neck and back pain. As the ALJ noted, Dr.…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.