Armstrong
Armstrong v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration
Opinion
Lead Opinion
*279 MEMORANDUM **
Sylvia Armstrong appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of the Social Security Administration. We exercise our jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and affirm.
Armstrong principally objects to the Administrative Law Judge’s reliance on the conclusions of a non-treating, consulting physician over those of her treating physician. The ALJ must provide “specific and legitimate reasons ... supported by substantial evidence in the record” for rejecting a treating or examining physician’s opinion. Lester v. Chater, 81 F.3d 821, 830-31 (9th Cir.1995). Where, as here, the ALJ has “[set] out a detailed and thorough summary of the facts and conflicting clinical evidence, stating his interpretation thereof, and making findings,” he has met that burden. Magallanes v. Bowen, 881 F.2d 747, 751 (9th Cir.1989) (internal quotation marks omitted).
Nor did the ALJ err in rejecting the evaluating psychologist’s conclusions. “Conclusory opinions by medical experts regarding the ultimate question of disability are not binding on the ALJ.” Nyman v. Heckler, 779 F.2d 528, 531 (9th Cir.1985).