Susan Burnaroos v. Carolyn Colvin
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Susan Burnaroos appeals the district court’s affirmance of the Commissioner’s denial of Social Security and Supplemental Security Income disability benefits. -We review the district court’s order de novo and the Commissioner’s denial of benefits for substantial evidence. Molina v. As true, 674 F.3d 1104, 1110 (9th Cir.2012). We affirm.
1.The Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) gave germane reasons for disregarding the Mental Medical Source Statement of Nina Rapisarda, M.S.W. See Turner v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 613 F.3d 1217, 1224 (9th Cir.2010). Substantial evidence supported the ALJ’s conclusions that Bur-naroos’s condition improved during 2009 and 2010, and that her complaints about agoraphobia and paranoia symptoms resolved over time and were inconsistent with her activities of daily living.
2. The ALJ did not fail to consider evidence from Shahm Martini, M.D., Jay Toews, Ed.D., Billy Nordyke, D.O., and Sandra Birdlebough, A.R.N.P. The ALJ specifically considered and cited the documents containing their opinions, and discussed Nordyke and Birdlebough’s documents at length.
3. The ALJ provided specific, clear and convincing reasons for disbelieving Burna-roos’s…