Stout

MEMORANDUM **

Gordon Stout appeals the district court’s affirmance of the Social Security Commissioner’s denial of his applications for Disability Insurance Benefits and Supplemental Security Income under Titles II and XVI, respectively, of the Social Security Act. Stout contends the administrative law judge (“ALJ”) failed to provide sufficient reasons for rejecting the opinions of his treating mental health care provider, Randy Olander, Ph.D, and examining psychologist, Judith Eckstein, Ph.D. We affirm on these issues.

Because the consultative medical expert, Eric Morrell, Ph.D., provided a contradicting opinion, the ALJ needed only to provide “specific and legitimate” reasons supported by substantial record evidence to reject Dr. Olander’s opinion. See Lester v. Chater, 81 F.3d 821, 830 (9th Cir.1995). We hold the ALJ did so here. As the ALJ noted, consistent with Dr. Morrell’s assessment that Stout “would get better if he worked rather than worse,” Stout’s mental health treating records indicate his symptoms improved when he worked. See Thomas v. Barnhart, 278 F.3d 947, 957 (9th Cir.2002) (explaining that a non-examining physician’s opinion may “serve as substantial…