Mamie Dean v. Commissioner of Social Securit
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Mamie N. Dean appeals from the district court’s judgment affirming the Commissioner of Social Security’s final decision that Dean was not disabled and not entitled to Disability Insurance Benefits under Title II of the Social Security Act. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo the district court’s order affirming 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 where, as here, it is supported by substantial evidence and the Commissioner applied the correct legal standards. Id.
1. The Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) gave “specific, clear and convincing reasons” for rejecting Dean’s testimony about the severity of her symptoms. See Vasquez v. Astrue, 572 F.3d 586, 591 (9th Cir.2009) (internal quotations and citation omitted). He found that Dean’s testimony was not consistent with the medical evidence, including a report from Dean’s psychological provider who “wondered about the validity” of Dean’s stories, a report from Dean’s doctor stating that she was doing “very well” after surgery, and a report from a medical provider who reported that Dean was…