Avenetti

MEMORANDUM *

Avenetti appeals from a summary judgment in favor of the Commissioner, affirming the termination of Avenetti’s disability benefits. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

Avenetti first argues that the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) failed to set forth adequate reasoning to justify his conclusions. This claim is foreclosed by Gonzalez v. Sullivan, where we approved a similar analysis and held that “[i]t is unnecessary to require the Secretary ... to state why a claimant failed to satisfy every different [listing], 914 F.2d 1197, 1200-01 (9th Cir.1990). The Secretary’s four page ‘evaluation of the evidence’ is an adequate statement of the foundations of which the ultimate factual conclusion are based.” Id. at 1201 (internal quotations omitted).

Avenetti next argues that the ALJ erred by relying exclusively on the assessment of a non-examining, non-testifying physician, Dr. Hopkins. On the contrary, the ALJ discussed and relied upon the assessments of Dr. Porter and Dr. Patel, as well as that of an occupational therapist. It is well established that “the findings of a non-treating, nonexamining physician can amount to substantial…