Brinegar

MEMORANDUM *

William S. Brinegar (“Brinegar”) appeals the district court’s decision affirming the Commissioner of Social Security’s denial of disability insurance benefits. We affirm.

The Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) did not err by rejecting the treating physician’s opinion. “The ALJ may not reject the opinion of a treating physician, even if it is contradicted by the opinions of other doctors, without providing ‘specific and legitimate reasons’ supported by substantial evidence in the record.” Rollins v. Massanari, 261 F.3d 853, 856 (9th Cir.2001) (quoting Reddick v. Chater, 157 F.3d 715, 725 (9th Cir.1998)). Here, the ALJ provided specific and legitimate reasons for rejecting the treating physician’s opinion, and the rejection was supported by substantial evidence.

Social Security Ruling (“SSR”) 96-2p did not require the ALJ to give deference to the tx-eating physician’s opinion, because the ALJ appropriately found that the treatixxg physician’s opinion was not “ ‘well-suppox'ted’ by ‘medically acceptable’ clinical and laboratory diagnostic tests.” SSR 96-2p, 1996 WL 374188 at *2-*3.

The ALJ had no duty to re-contact the treating physician. The duty to recontact a…