Ferguson

Ferguson v. Astrue

Good Law
225 F. App'x 719
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 23, 2007No. 04-57157California395 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

The administrative law judge’s (“ALJ”) decision that Ferguson had the residual functional capacity to perform unskilled, medium exertion work was supported by substantial evidence and free from legal error. See Tidwell v. Apfel, 161 F.3d 599, 601 (9th Cir.1999). The ALJ gave specific, cogent reasons supported by substantial evidence for disbelieving Ferguson’s testimony regarding her symptoms and disability. See Lester v. Chater, 81 F.3d 821, 834 (9th Cir.1996). Among other reasons, the ALJ identified inconsistencies in Ferguson’s testimony and the lack of objective backing for her claims.

The ALJ also gave clear reasons supported by substantial evidence for discounting the checkbox forms of treating physicians Drs. O. Troum and Okpara, including the fact that neither form was supported by objective medical evidence, see Batson v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 359 F.3d 1190, 1195 (9th Cir.2004), and that Dr. Okpara’s form was completed more than four years after the expiration of Ferguson’s insured status, see Tidwell, 161 F.3d at 602 . The ALJ properly discounted Dr. Schatz’s report, because Ferguson made a poor effort during her examination and because the report relied…

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.