Gonzalez
Gonzalez v. Astrue
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM ***
Margarita Gonzalez (“Gonzalez”) appeals the district court’s summary judgment grant affirming the decision of the Commissioner of Social Security (“Commissioner”) denying her application for Supplemental Security Income Disability Benefits under Title XVI of the Social Security Act. For the reasons that follow, we reverse the judgment of the district court.
Substantial evidence does not support the decision of the Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”). The ALJ chose to disregard the opinion of Dr. Andre Jacobo, Gonzalez’s treating, examining physician and based that disregard on the opinion of Dr. Albert Lizarraras, a non-treating, non-examining physician who assessed Gonzalez’s disability prior to the issuance of Dr. Jacobo’s report. See Andrews v. Shalala, 53 F.3d 1035, 1041 (9th Cir.1995) (holding that “clear and convincing reasons” are required to reject a treating physician’s uncontradicted opinion). Even if we were to somehow treat the Jacobo opinion as contradicted, the ALJ did not provide the “specific and legitimate reasons ... supported by substantial evidence in the record” required to disregard a contradicted report. Edlund v. Massanari, 253 F.3d 1152, 1157…
Dissenting Opinion
Fisher, J.
dissenting:
I would affirm the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of the Commissioner.
In addition to finding Dr. Lizarraras’ functional assessment well-reasoned and consistent with the record, the ALJ provided other specific and legitimate reasons for discounting Dr. Jacobo’s opinion that the majority does not address. These reasons are supported by substantial evidence in the record. Further, the ALJ also considered the opinion of Dr. Thomas Schweller, an examining medical consultant who opined that Gonzalez was capable of light level functioning with occasional limits in bending, stooping and squatting. Dr. Jacobo noted that he disagreed with the report from Dr. Schweller, thereby acknowledging that his opinion was contradicted. See Edlund v. Massanan, 253 F.3d 1152, 1157 (“if contradicted by another doctor, the testimony of a treating physician can only be rejected for specific and legitimate reasons that are supported by substantial evidence in the record”) (internal quotation marks omitted).
The majority also overlooks some of the reasons the ALJ provided for finding Gonzalez not a credible witness. For example, the ALJ specified that Gonzalez answered…