Leilanie Thune v. Michael Astrue

MEMORANDUM

Leilanie D. Thune appeals from the district court’s decision granting summary judgment in favor of the Commissioner of Social Security (“Commissioner”) and affirming the Commissioner’s final decision, which concluded that Thune was not entitled to Disability Insurance Benefits under Title II of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 401-434 . We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo the district court’s order upholding the Commissioner’s decision. Batson v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec. Admin., 359 F.3d 1190, 1193 (9th Cir.2004). We affirm the decision of the Commissioner if it is sup-poi-ted by substantial evidence, and the Commissioner applied the correct legal standards. Id. The “Commissioner’s findings are upheld if supported by inferences reasonably drawn from the record.” Id. If evidence exists to support more than one rational interpretation, we must defer to the Commissioner’s decision. Morgan v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec. Admin., 169 F.3d 595, 599 (9th Cir.1999). We affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand.

I

Substantial evidence supports the Administrative Law Judge’s (“ALJ”) determination that Thune’s depression was not severe because it caused her…