Anglin

Anglin v. Massanari

Good Law
18 F. App'x 551
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 30, 2001No. 00-55332; D.C. No. CV-99-07758-CTCalifornia1,208 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Anglin appeals from the district court’s summary judgment affirming the Social Security Administration’s (SSA’s) denial of disability benefits. We have jurisdiction over this timely filed appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and we affirm.

We review de novo a district court’s order upholding the Commissioner’s denial of benefits. Harman v. Apfel, 211 F.3d 1172, 1174 (9th Cir.2000). The decision of the Commissioner must be affirmed if it is supported by substantial evidence and the Commissioner applied the correct legal standards. Tackett v. Apfel, 180 F.3d 1094, 1097 (9th Cir.1999). Substantial evidence is more than a scintilla but less than a preponderance. Id. at 1098 . It means such evidence that a reasonable person might accept as adequate to support a conclusion, and is determined by reviewing the entire administrative record. Magallanes v. Bowen, 881 F.2d 747, 750 (9th Cir.1989).

Anglin first contends that the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) improperly rejected the opinion of his treating physicians, relying instead on the non-treating, non-examining medical expert’s opinion to determine that he remains capable of performing medium work. As a general matter,…

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.