Gregory Hanbey v. Michael Astrue
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Gregory Hanbey appeals the district court’s judgment affirming the Social Security Administration’s denial of his application for disability insurance benefits. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We affirm, deciding the issues raised on appeal as follows:
(1) The Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) provided clear, convincing, and specific reasons to support his adverse credibility determination as to Hanbey and germane reasons to support his adverse credibility determination as to Hanbey’s wife. Substantial evidence supported each of these determinations. Burch v. Barnhart, 400 F.3d 676, 679-80 (9th Cir.2005). For example, the ALJ noted that both Hanbey and his spouse alleged that he had substantial unintended weight loss, then found that this alleged symptom was unsupported by the treatment records.
(2) The ALJ’s interpretation of Dr. Crossen’s opinion differed from Hanbey’s interpretation. But the ALJ’s interpretation must be upheld so long as it is rational and supported by substantial evidence. Edlund v. Massanari, 253 F.3d 1152, 1156 (9th Cir.2001); cf. Lingenfelter v. Astrue, 504 F.3d 1028, 1043 (9th Cir.2007). That is the case here, as the ALJ rationally…