Robert Cole v. Michael Astrue

MEMORANDUM

Appellant Robert J. Cole (Cole) challenges the district court’s judgment up holding the Commissioner of Social Security’s denial of Cole’s application for supplemental security income. We affirm the district court’s judgment.

Because the Administrative Law Judge’s (ALJ) decision was supported by the medical evidence and was consistent with the conclusions of Cole’s treating doctors, there was no need to provide clear and convincing reasons for rejecting the treating doctor’s opinions. See Turner v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 613 F.3d 1217, 1223 (9th Cir.2010) (noting that “the ALJ need not provide ‘clear and convincing reasons’ for rejecting [a doctor’s report]” where the ALJ did not reject the doctor’s opinions).

Because Cole does not point to any conflicting medical evidence, the ALJ’s finding that Cole was not disabled due to his visual impairments was reasonably supported by the objective medical evidence. See Batson v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec. Admin., 359 F.3d 1190, 1196 (9th Cir.2004) (recognizing that “we may not substitute our judgment for that of the ALJ ....”) (citation omitted).

Based on Cole’s daily activities, the ALJ provided the requisite specific findings in…