Edward Houghton v. Commissioner Social Security Administration

Good Law
493 F. App'x 843
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 14, 201211-35623California816 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Edward Houghton appeals pro se the district court’s judgment affirming the Commissioner of Social Security’s denial of his application for disability insurance benefits under Title II of the Social Security Act. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and affirm.

We review de novo a district court’s judgment upholding the denial of social security benefits. Tommasetti v. Astrue, 538 F.3d 1035 , 1038 (9th Cir.2008). We must affirm the denial of benefits unless it is based on legal error or the findings of fact are not supported by substantial evidence. Valentine v. Comm’r Soc. Sec. Admin., 574 F.3d 685, 690 (9th Cir.2009).

Houghton contends the ALJ improperly discredited his subjective statements concerning the intensity, persistence, and limiting effects of his impairments. An ALJ’s credibility determination must be based on specific findings supported by substantial evidence and clear and convincing reasons. Tommasetti, 533 F.3d at 1039; Carmickle v. Comm’r, Soc. Sec. Admin., 533 F.3d 1155, 1160-61 (9th Cir.2008).

The ALJ provided a clear and convincing explanation for his credibility finding, supported by statements from treating and examining sources who…

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.