Css

MEMORANDUM

Claimant-Appellant Michelle Wake appeals the district court’s decision affirming the Commissioner of Social Security’s denial of her application for supplemental security income benefits.

I. Claimant’s Credibility

If there is no evidence of malingering, an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) may only reject the claimant’s testimony about the severity of symptoms if he gives “specific, clear and convincing reasons for the rejection.” Vasquez v. Astrue, 572 F.3d 586, 591 (9th Cir.2009), as amended (citation and internal quotation marks omitted). “The ALJ must specifically identify what testimony is credible and what testimony undermines the claimant’s complaints....” Valentine v. Comm’r. of Soc. Sec. Admin., 574 F.3d 685, 693 (9th Cir.2009) (citation omitted).

The ALJ did not err by considering inconsistent statements about Wake’s drinking history when assessing her credibility. See e.g. Verduzco v. Apfel, 188 F.3d 1087, 1090 (9th Cir.1999); Thomas v. Barnhart, 278 F.3d 947, 959 (9th Cir.2002).

An ALJ may also normally rely upon a claimant’s noncompliance with treatment to provide clear and convincing evidence for an adverse credibility finding. See Orn v. Astrue, 495…