Duff

Duff v. Barnhart

Good Law
121 F. App'x 697
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJanuary 27, 2005No. 03-35622; D.C. No. CV-02-05469-RJBCalifornia512 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Plaintiff Deborah L. Duff appeals from the district court’s order affirming the decision of the Commissioner of Social Security to deny her application for disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income. We review the district court’s decision de novo. Reddick v. Chater, 157 F.3d 715, 720 (9th Cir.1998). We review the Commissioner’s findings for substantial evidence, id., and reverse and remand.

The administrative law judge (ALJ) found, at Step Two of the sequential analysis, that Plaintiff “has mild scoliosis, which [is] not severe; she has an affective disorder, an impairment[ ] that is severe within the meaning of the Regulations.” He rejected all other claimed impairments. The ALJ erred in three ways when addressing Plaintiffs impairments.

*699 First, the ALJ erred in rejecting without discussion Dr. Neims’ final diagnosis of somatization disorder. Although the ALJ noted Dr. Neims’ earlier uncertainties in 2000, he failed to mention, and apparently failed even to consider, Dr. Neims’ final “established diagnosis” of somatization disorder in March 2001. Rather, the ALJ incorrectly faulted Plaintiff for “offerfing] no support for this supposition”…

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.