Kathryn Cotton v. Michael Astrue

MEMORANDUM *

Kathryn Terhune Cotton appeals the district court’s judgment affirming the determination of the administrative law judge (ALJ) that she is ineligible for disability benefits under Title II of the Social Security Act. We affirm.

I

Cotton testified that she had chronic fatigue, pain all over her body, worsening fibromyalgia, a sleep disorder, difficulty concentrating, and sometimes stayed in bed for days. She argues that the ALJ improperly discredited this testimony. However, the ALJ made specific findings stating clear and convincing reasons for-doing so based on the following: medical evidence that Cotton was histrionic, prone to dramatize and embellish symptoms; the ALJ’s own observations, which indicated that Cotton exaggerated the extent of her hearing loss; the absence of any physical disorders that might clinically produce symptoms of the severity claimed by Cotton; and the nature of Cotton’s daily activities, which included walking a mile four times a week as well as caring for and *771 training clogs, that exceeded her self-reported limitations. See Smolen v. Chater, 80 F.3d 1273, 1284 (9th Cir.1996) (stating requirement for rejecting credibility of an…

dissenting:

Cotton’s allegations of disabling physical and mental pain were supported by the uncontradicted opinions of four treating doctors. The ALJ rejected Cotton’s allegations based on a finding that she lacked credibility, and rejected the opinions of all four of her treating doctors largely based on the idea that their diagnoses were based on Cotton’s own (incredible) self-reporting. The majority holds that both the ALJ’s adverse credibility determination and her evaluation of the medical opinion evidence were supported by “clear and convincing” reasons. I respectfully disagree, and would hold that the ALJ erred in both of these determinations.

I

Because Cotton “produce[d] objective medical evidence of an underlying impairment or impairments that could reasonably be expected to produce some degree of symptom,” and because “there is no affirmative evidence of malingering, the ALJ [could] reject [Cotton’s] testimony about the severity of her symptoms only by offering specific, clear and convincing reasons for doing so.” Tommasetti v. Astrue, 533 F.3d 1035, 1039 (9th Cir.2008) (quota *773 tion marks omitted). The ALJ did not meet this burden.

First, the ALJ’s selective…

FILED

NOT FOR PUBLICATION APR 02 2010

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

KATHRYN TERHUNE COTTON, No. 08-35428

Plaintiff - Appellant, D.C. No. 3:06-CV-06324-HA

v.

MEMORANDUM *

MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social Security Administration,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Oregon Ancer L. Haggerty, Senior District Judge, Presiding

Argued and Submitted February 2, 2010 Seattle, Washington

Before: RYMER, GOULD and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.

Kathryn Terhune Cotton appeals the district court’s judgment affirming the

determination of the administrative law judge (ALJ) that she is ineligible for

disability benefits under Title II of the Social Security Act. We affirm.

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. I

Cotton testified that she had chronic fatigue, pain all over her body,

worsening fibromyalgia, a sleep disorder, difficulty concentrating, and sometimes

stayed in bed for days. She…