Ortiz

Ortiz v. Barnhart

Good Law
145 F. App'x 574
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 15, 2005No. 04-15476California306 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Janie A. Ortiz appeals the district court’s order affirming the Commissioner of Social Security’s (“Commissioner”) determination that she was not disabled, and therefore ineligible for benefits under Title XVI of the Social Security Act. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo the district court’s order affirming the Commissioner’s denial of benefits, see Morgan v. Apfel, 169 F.3d 595, 599 (9th Cir.1999), and we affirm.

The ALJ’s finding that Ortiz was not disabled is supported by substantial evidence in the record. Contrary to Ortiz’s contention, the ALJ provided “specific and legitimate reasons” for rejecting several opinions of Ortiz’s treating physicians, including inconsistencies between their treatment notes and their conclusions. See Rollins v. Massanari, 261 F.3d 853, 856 (9th Cir.2001).

Substantial evidence also supports the Administrative Law Judge’s (“ALJ”) finding that Ortiz was not credible because Ortiz’s testimony regarding the severity of her wrist and back pain was not mentioned with any frequency in the treating medical records, she received very little treatment for these complaints, she reported to Dr. Vaughan that…

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.