Rusten v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration

Good Law
468 F. App'x 717
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 16, 201210-35514California1,029 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

James Rusten appeals the district court’s summary judgment affirmance of the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration’s denial of Social Security disability benefits. The Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) found that Rusten’s combination of impairments did not significantly limit Rusten’s ability to perform work, leading to a finding of “not disabled” under 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520 (a)(4). Rusten contends that the ALJ erred by giving little weight to his own testimony, the lay testimony of his wife and mother and the medical opinions of Dr. Verby, Dr. Chandler and Nurse Billings. Because the ALJ’s denial was supported by substantial evidence, we affirm.

We have jurisdiction over this case under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . The facts of the case are known to the parties. We do not repeat them here.

I

The ALJ gave specific, clear and convincing reasons for giving Rusten’s testimony slight weight. See Smolen v. Chater, 80 F.3d 1273, 1281 (9th Cir.1996). The ALJ noted that there were inconsistencies between Rusten’s testimony and the medical record, and inconsistencies within Rusten’s testimony itself. Inconsistent assertions in a claimant’s testimony, and between a claimant’s…

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.