Roquemore v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration

MEMORANDUM

John D. Roquemore appeals the district court’s decision affirming denial of his application for Disability Insurance Benefits and Supplemental Security Income by the Commissioner of Social Security. We affirm.

The administrative law judge (ALJ) offered clear and convincing reasons for rejecting Roquemore’s pain testimony to the degree that it conflicted with his residual functional capacity (RFC). See Lester v. Chater, 81 F.3d 821, 834 (9th Cir.1995). Specifically, the ALJ noted that treatment of Roquemore’s impairments had been conservative in nature, consisting of only medication and physical therapy; that he had been encouraged by health practitioners to get more exercise, including swimming, biking, and walking; and that the medical evidence in the record does not support the conclusion that Roquemore’s condition limits his daily activities to the degree that he claimed. These reasons are supported by the record and identified which symptom testimony was not credible and what facts in the record led to that conclusion. See Smolen v. Chater, 80 F.3d 1273, 1284 (9th Cir.1996).

Roquemore argues that the ALJ erred by failing to consider the side effects of his…