Gonsalves v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration

MEMORANDUM

Gary Gonsalves applied for Social Security disability benefits and Supplemental Security Income pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §§ 405 (g), 1388(e)(3). An administrative law judge denied his claims and the district court affirmed. Gonsalves now appeals. We review the denial of benefits de novo. Vasquez v. Astrue, 572 F.3d 586, 590-91 (9th Cir.2009). We must uphold the ALJ’s decision if it is supported by substantial evidence and is not based upon legal error. Tidwell v. Apfel, 161 F.3d 599, 601 (9th Cir.1998). We affirm.

Gonsalves raises three issues on appeal. First, he contends that the ALJ erred by finding his testimony about the severity of his pain not credible. Second, he argues that the ALJ erred in evaluating the opinions of the examining and treating physicians. Third, Gonsalves alleges that the ALJ erred in finding that he had a single, non-severe impairment.

The ALJ was required to provide clear and convincing reasons for discrediting Gonsalves’ pain testimony. See Tommasetti v. Astrue, 533 F.3d 1035, 1039 (9th Cir.2008). The ALJ provided five reasons: (1) Gonsalves had a conservative treatment plan, (2) Gonsalves’ subjective complaints were inconsistent with other…