Constantine

Constantine v. Barnhart

Good Law
126 F. App'x 399
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 25, 2005No. 03-35981; D.C. No. CV-02-01496-TSZCalifornia546 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Bradley W. Constantine appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment to the Commissioner of Social Security, which upheld the Commissioner’s denial of disability benefits to him. See 42 U.S.C. §§ 401 — 434,1381 — 1384. We affirm.

Constantine makes a number of claims relating to the Administrative Law Judge’s consideration of the evidence. 1 An ALJ’s determination must be upheld if it is supported by substantial evidence and applies the correct legal standards. See Edlund v. Massanari, 253 F.3d 1152, 1156 (9th Cir. 2001). However, if an ALJ rejects the opinion of a treating physician, the ALJ must give clear and convincing reasons if the opinion is not contradicted by other evidence, and specific and legitimate reasons if it is. See Reddick v. Chater, 157 F.3d 715, 725 (9th Cir.1998); Lester v. Chater, 81 F.3d 821, 830-31 (9th Cir.1995); Andrews v. Shalala, 53 F.3d 1035 , 1041— 43 (9th Cir.1995). Moreover, when an ALJ rejects a claimant’s own testimony about his limitations, the ALJ must provide a “specific, cogent reason[] for the disbelief.” Lester, 81 F.3d at 834 (internal quotation marks omitted); see also Thomas v. Barnhart, 278 F.3d 947 , 958 — 59…

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.