E. Glasgow v. Michael Astrue

Good Law
360 F. App'x 836
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 29, 200908-35943California741 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

E. Joyce Glasgow (“Glasgow”) appeals the district court’s judgment affirming the Commissioner of Social Security’s (“Commissioner”) denial of Glasgow’s application for disability-insurance benefits under Titles II and XVI of the Social Security Act. At step two of the five-step sequential evaluation process, the administrative law judge (“ALJ”) determined that Glasgow did not meet her burden of proving that she had a severe medical impairment. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm the district court.

We review the district court’s order affirming the Commissioner’s denial of benefits de novo. Orn v. Astrue, 495 F.3d 625, 630 (9th Cir.2007). The underlying decision of the ALJ, however, is entitled to far more deference. We will reverse the denial of benefits only if the decision “contains legal error or is not supported by substantial evidence.” Id. Substantial evidence means more than a mere scintilla but less than a preponderance. Valentine v. Comm’r Soc. Sec. Admin., 574 F.3d 685, 690 (9th Cir.2009). It also means such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion. Id. Moreover, “if evidence…

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.