Oganes Agadzhanyan v. Michael Astrue

MEMORANDUM

Oganes Agadzhanyan (“Appellant”) appeals from the district court’s order affirming the Commissioner of Social Security’s denial of disability insurance benefits under the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 401-83 (“the Act”). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

This Court reviews the district court’s order de novo. Flaten v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 44 F.3d 1453, 1457 (9th Cir.1995). The appropriate standard of review is whether the administrative law judge’s (“ALJ”) findings of fact are supported by substantial evidence and whether the ALJ applied the correct legal standards. Batson v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec. Admin., 359 F.3d 1190, 1193 (9th Cir.2004).

The magistrate judge properly concluded that the ALJ’s decision to deny benefits was supported by substantial evidence. The magistrate judge also properly concluded that the ALJ did not err in finding Appellant to be less than fully credible, discounting the testimony of an examining physician, and deciding not to order further psychological testing. The ALJ also did not err in propounding a hypothetical scenario to a Vocational Expert (“VE”) and relying on the VE’s testimony. Finally,…