Stefanie Beason v. Carolyn W. Colvin

Good Law
611 F. App'x 905
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 19, 201513-55766California273 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Stefanie Beason 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. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

We review de novo the district court’s order affirming the denial of disability benefits. Ora v. Astrue, 495 F.3d 625, 630 (9th Cir.2007). We uphold the Administrative Law Judge’s (ALJ) disability determination “unless it contains legal error or is not supported by substantial evidence.” Id.

Beason raises a single argument on appeal: that the ALJ ignored and improperly rejected the testimony of the medical expert, called by the ALJ herself, who opined that Beason met the listing for affective disorders. This argument lacks merit. Because the medical expert neither examined nor treated the claimant, the ALJ was required only to “consider” the expert’s testimony in conjunction with other record evidence. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1527 (e). Here, the ALJ weighed the medical expert’s testimony against the reports of three other non-examining consultants and assigned less weight to the medical expert’s…

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.