Nunez

MEMORANDUM ****

Vickie Nunez appeals from the district court’s order upholding the Administrative Law Judge’s (ALJ) denial of social security disability benefits. We affirm. Because the parties are familiar with the facts and procedural history, we do not restate them here except as necessary to explain our disposition.

Substantial evidence supports the ALJ’s determination that Nunez’s impairments did not meet or equal Listing 1.13 or Listing 1.05C. The record does not clearly establish, by means of objective medical signs and laboratory findings, that Nunez’s condition met the requirements of either listing during the relevant time period. See Burch v. Barnhart, 400 F.3d 676, 679 (9th Cir.2005); Young v. Sullivan, 911 F.2d 180, 184-85 (9th Cir.1990). Where the evidence is unclear or conflicting, we must uphold the Commissioner’s decision. Burch, 400 F.3d at 679 ; Sandgathe v. Chater, 108 F.3d 978, 980 (9th Cir.1997).

Further, the ALJ did not err by relying on the medical opinion of a non-examining physician, Dr. Gurvey, who disagreed with the findings of Nunez’s treating and examining physicians. “Although ‘more weight is given to a treating physician’s opinion than to the…