Sabin

Sabin v. Astrue

Good Law
337 F. App'x 617
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 12, 2009No. 08-35338California1,211 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM ***

Appellant Peggy Sabin (“Sabin”) appeals the district court’s decision affirming the Commissioner of Social Security’s denial of her applications for Disability Insurance Benefits and Supplemental Security Income under Titles II and XVI of the Social Security Act. The parties are familiar with the facts and procedural history, and we discuss them only as necessary to explain our decision. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo a district court’s decision upholding the denial of social security benefits and will set aside a denial only if it is not supported by substantial evidence or is based on legal error. Lingenfelter v. Astrue, 504 F.3d 1028, 1035 (9th Cir.2007). We affirm.

I.

Sabin argues that the Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) erred in rejecting examining physician Dr. Ted Bushnell’s conclusion that Sabin’s tremor restricted her to handling only occasionally and thus that the ALJ erred in concluding she could be a garment sorter, which requires frequent handling but only occasional fingering. Dictionary of Occupational Titles 222.687-014, available at 1991 WL 672131 . To reject an examining doctor’s opinion that is…

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.