Michaels

MEMORANDUM **

Appellant Joyce Michaels appeals from the denial in March 1996 of her application for Social Security disability and supplemental benefits. Because the parties are familiar with the facts surrounding this case, we do not repeat them here.

In essence, we find that the Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) erred as a matter of law in rejecting Michaels’s subjective testimony concerning her pain and other symptoms under an improper legal standard. The ALJ’s conclusion that Michaels was not credible subsequently colored his analysis of the opinions of Michaels’s treating physician and examining psychologists, as well as the lay testimony of Michaels’s brother. Because of these errors, we vacate the decision of the district court with instructions to remand to the ALJ for reconsideration of the evidence under the proper legal standards.

I.

We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . The district court’s order upholding the Commissioner’s denial of benefits is reviewed de novo. Harman v. Apfel, 211 F.3d 1172, 1174 (9th Cir. 2000). The ALJ is responsible for determining credibility, resolving conflicts in medical testimony, and resolving ambiguities. Andrews v.…