Dotson

Dotson v. Barnhart

Good Law
72 F. App'x 650
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 6, 2003No. 02-35057; D.C. No. CV-00-06300-MACalifornia510 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Catherine Dotson appeals the district court’s judgment affirming the Commissioner’s final decision that she was not disabled under Title II of the Social Security Act. We reverse and remand with instructions for additional findings on the extent and nature of Dotson’s alleged disability.

The facts of this case are familiar to the parties and we recite them here only to the extent necessary. Dotson filed an application for disability benefits in August 1997, claiming that her condition of fibromyalgia prevented substantial gainful employment starting from April 1996.

Dr. Andresen, Dotson’s treating physician, wrote to the Commissioner and stated that Dotson was capable of working only four hours a day, on a part-time basis. “As a general rule, more weight should be given to the opinion of a treating [physician] than to the opinion of doctors who do not treat the claimant.” Lester v. Chater, 81 F.3d 821, 830 (9th Cir.1995) (citations omitted). Here, the Administrative Law *652 Judge (ALJ) rejected Dr. Andresen’s opinion because the treatment notes did not mention physical limitations and suggested conservative treatment measures. We believe these reasons are neither…

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.