Susan Burnaroos v. Carolyn Colvin

Good Law
610 F. App'x 617
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 21, 201513-35952California491 words

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…

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.