Terri Dukes v. Michael Astrue

MEMORANDUM

Terri Lynn Dukes appeals the district court’s order affirming the Social Security Administration Commissioner’s decision denying her application for Supplemental Security Income and Disability Insurance Benefits.

We review de novo a district court’s order affirming the Commissioner’s decision to deny benefits. Tackett v. Apfel, 180 F.3d 1094, 1097 (9th Cir.1999). We reverse the Commissioner’s decision only if it is based on legal error or is not supported by substantial evidence. Id. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We affirm the district court’s order.

The facts of this case are known to the parties. We do not repeat them.

The Commissioner’s decision is supported by substantial evidence in the record and is not based on legal error. The administrative law judge (“ALJ”) properly followed the five-step sequential test of 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520 .

The ALJ properly rejected Dukes’s testimony as not credible by making several specific findings of inconsistencies in her claims and in the record. See Thomas v. Barnhart, 278 F.3d 947, 958 (9th Cir.2002) (holding that an ALJ’s credibility determination must contain “findings sufficiently specific to permit the…