Nikitchuk

MEMORANDUM ***

Reviewing de novo the district court’s order upholding the Social Security Commissioner’s (“Commissioner”) denial of benefits, we may not set aside the Commissioner’s decision if it is both free of legal error and supported by substantial evidence. Schneider v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec. Admin., 223 F.3d 968, 973 (9th Cir.2000); Gonzalez v. Sullivan, 914 F.2d 1197, 1200 (9th Cir.1990). The substantial evidence inquiry is satisfied by “such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion.” Andrews v. Shalala, 53 F.3d 1035, 1039 (9th Cir.1995). Applying this standard, an Administrative Law Judge’s (“ALJ”) “findings are upheld if supported by inferences reasonably drawn from the record, and if evidence exists to support more than one rational interpretation, we must defer to the [ALJ’s] decision.” Bat-son v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec. Admin., 359 F.3d 1190 , 1193 & n. 1 (9th Cir.2004) (internal citations omitted).

An ALJ can reject a claimant’s testimony regarding the severity of symptoms with “specific findings stating clear and convincing reasons for doing so.” Id. at 1196 (citation omitted). Where an ALJ’s credibility finding is supported…