Leaks

MEMORANDUM ***

Karen O. Leaks appeals the district court’s judgment affirming the Commissioner of Social Security’s denial of her applications for disability insurance bene *745 fits and supplemental security income benefits. She contends that the Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) erred by: (1) rejecting the opinion of her treating physician; (2) failing to credit her testimony as to the extent and nature of her pain and fatigue; and (3) failing to include all of her limitations in the hypothetical posed to the vocational expert. Because the parties are familiar with the facts of this case, we do not separately recount them here. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

We review de novo the district court’s order affirming the denial of social security benefits by the Commissioner. Moisa v. Barnhart, 367 F.3d 882, 885 (9th Cir.2004). We must uphold the Commissioner’s denial of benefits if it is supported by substantial evidence and is based on an application of the proper legal standard. Webb v. Barnhart, 433 F.3d 683, 686 (9th Cir.2005).

First, the ALJ provided clear and convincing reasons, supported by substantial evidence in the record, for…