Yanez

MEMORANDUM ***

Yanez appeals the district court’s judgment affirming the Administrative Law Judge’s (ALJ) denial of his application for social security disability insurance benefits. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

We may set aside an ALJ’s decision only “if it is not supported by substantial evidence or if it is based on legal error.” Flaten v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 44 F.3d 1453, 1457 (9th Cir.1995). So long as the evidence can reasonably support the ALJ’s decision, we may not substitute our own judgment for that of the ALJ. Id.

Yanez argues that the ALJ’s decision is not supported by substantial evidence, because the ALJ relied exclusively on the testimony of non-examining physicians. To the contrary, the ALJ based the decision on a number of sources in the record. Most notably, the ALJ found that Yanez’s treating physician was of the opinion that Yanez “qualifies for a sedentary job.” The ALJ further found that Yanez “can ambulate independently, effectively, and without assistance devices.” Finally, the ALJ indicated that Yanez’s right-knee surgery had been successful and anticipated similar results for his scheduled left-knee…

concurring:

I concur in the result.