Brooks

Brooks v. Barnhart

Good Law
118 F. App'x 167
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 30, 2004No. 03-15639California552 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Petitioner Randy L. Brooks (“Brooks”), formerly a horse breaker from Corning, California, appeals the district court’s order denying his application for disability insurance benefits pursuant to Title II and Title XVI of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. § 405 (g) and 42 U.S.C. § 1383 (c)(3). The district court affirmed the decision of the administrative law judge (“ALJ”) denying petitioner’s application for disability benefits.

We review a district court’s order affirming the Social Security Commissioner’s denial of benefits de novo. See Lewis v. Apfel, 236 F.3d 503, 509 (9th Cir.2001). This court will affirm the Commissioner’s determination that a petitioner is not disabled if the findings of fact are supported by “substantial evidence” and the Commissioner applied the proper legal standards. See Curry v. Sullivan, 925 F.2d 1127, 1129 (9th Cir.1991). We affirm for the reasons given by the district court.

First, petitioner argues that substantial evidence does not support the ALJ’s determination that petitioner does not suffer from a “severe impairment” as a result of the “combined effect” of multiple conditions under 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520 (a)(4)(ii). However,…

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.