Johnny Amaro v. Carolyn W. Colvin

MEMORANDUM

Johnny Amaro appeals the district court’s judgment affirming the decision of an administrative law judge (“ALJ”) denying his application for Disability Insurance Benefits and Supplemental Security Income. We reverse and remand for further proceedings.

Because the ALJ found that a medically determinable impairment could reasonably be expected to cause Amaro’s symptoms, he could only reject Amaro’s testimony regarding the severity of those symptoms if he offered “specific, clear and convincing reasons for doing so.” See Lingenfelter v. Astrue, 504 F.3d 1028, 1036 (9th Cir.2007) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted). In finding that a claimant is not credible, an ALJ may consider (among other factors) the objective medical evidence. See Valentine v. Comm’r Social Sec. Admin., 574 F.3d 685, 693 (9th Cir.2009); SSR 95-5p. However, a claimant “need not produce objective medical evidence of the pain or fatigue itself, or the severity thereof.” Smolen v. Chater, 80 F.3d 1273, 1282 (9th Cir.1996).

Here, the ALJ concluded that Amaro’s testimony was inconsistent with the objective medical evidence, because the record showed 1) “conservative, routine care ... with no…