Joyce Ryan-Werry v. Carolyn W. Colvin

MEMORANDUM

Joyce Ryan-Werry (“Ryan-Werry”) appeals from the district court’s order affirming the Administrative Law Judge’s (“ALJ”) denial of benefits. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

1. Ryan-Werry argues that the ALJ erred by according “little weight” to the opinions of three of her treating and examining physicians, Drs. John Daniel, Fletcher Taylor, and Loren McCollom, and by according “some weight” to another examining physician, Dr. Terilee Wingate. Where, as here, “a treating or examining doctor’s opinion is contradicted by another doctor’s opinion, an ALJ may only reject it by providing specific and legitimate reasons that are supported by substantial evidence.” Chaudhry v. Astrue, 688 F.3d 661, 671 (9th Cir.2012) (citations, internal quotation marks, and alteration omitted).

a. The ALJ properly discredited Dr. Daniel’s opinion because his conclusions were inconsistent with Ryan-Werry’s own testimony. See Morgan v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec. Admin., 169 F.3d 695 , 602-03 (9th Cir.1999) (upholding an ALJ’s rejection of a treating physician’s opinion where the “ALJ cited to testimony from [the claimant] that conflicted with the” physician’s…