Lehrman

MEMORANDUM *

Billie Jo Lehrman appeals the district court’s judgment affirming the denial of supplemental social security income benefits. We affirm.

1. The administrative law judge (ALJ) permissibly rejected the diagnosis of pain disorder or somatoform disorder offered by Dr. Haydon and Dr. Stoltzfus, as well as Dr. Haydon’s assessment of Lehrmaris residual functional capacity.

The ALJ rejected portions of Dr. Hay-don’s 2000 opinion as inconsistent with his narrative findings and his assessment of the claimant’s global functioning. The ALJ relied, for example, on Dr. Haydon’s note that Lehrmaris “allegations of continuous pain were not supported by any evidence of impaired gross or fine motor skills.”

The ALJ rejected Dr. Stoltzfus’ diagnosis because it was supported neither by “persistent objective findings” in the records of Lehrmaris treating doctors, needed to establish the durational requirement of the disorder, nor by clinical findings in Dr. Stoltzfus’ own narrative report. The ALJ also observed that Dr. Stoltzfus had failed to consider Lehrmaris “motivation for secondary gain” in arriving at a diagnosis.

These reasons are specific, legitimate, and supported by…