Tamela Latta v. Michael Astrue

Good Law
482 F. App'x 261
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 1, 201211-35493California786 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Tamela Latta appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment against her on her claim for review of the Social Security Commissioner’s (Commissioner) denial of disability benefits. The Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) at Latta’s disability hearing concluded that Latta could return to her former occupation as a sales clerk in women’s apparel and is therefore not disabled. Latta sought review in federal district court, and the district court upheld the ALJ’s decision. Latta now appeals the district court’s order. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

I

Latta first argues that the ALJ’s determination that she is not disabled was erroneous because in defining Latta’s residual functional capacity (RFC), the ALJ (1) did not credit her subjective claims of pain and (2) relied on the opinion of a non-examining physician instead of Latta’s treating physicians and other healthcare providers.

The ALJ provided clear and convincing reasons, supported by substantial evidence, in finding that Latta’s representations as to the severity of her pain were not credible. See Tommasetti v. Astrue, 533 F.3d 1035, 1038-40 (9th Cir.2008). As the ALJ noted, the…

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.