Russell

MEMORANDUM ****

Barbara Russell appeals the district court’s judgment affirming the Commissioner of Social Security’s (“Commissioner”) denial of her application for Supplemental Security Income. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo the district court’s summary judgment and uphold the Commissioner’s decision if it is supported by substantial evidence and free of legal error. Tidwell v. Apfel, 161 F.3d 599, 601 (9th Cir.1998). We affirm.

The ALJ provided specific and cogent reasons, supported by substantial evidence in the record, for rejecting claimant’s subjective complaints of limitations. See Flaten v. Sec’y of Health & Human Sews., 44 F.3d 1453, 1464 (9th Cir.1995).

The ALJ properly discredited the reports of Dr. Trowbridge and Dr. Neims because their reports lacked comprehensive evaluations and conflicted with the more detailed reports of Dr. Bremer. See Crane v. Shalala, 76 F.3d 251, 253 (9th Cir.1996).

Contrary to claimant’s contention, the ALJ was not required to call a medical examiner because the record was adequate for the ALJ to make a determination regarding claimant’s mental impairment. See Smolen v. Chater, 80 F.3d 1273, 1288 (9th…