Martinez

Martinez v. Astrue

Good Law
261 F. App'x 33
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 20, 2007No. 05-17265California718 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM ****

The facts and procedural posture of the case are known to the parties, and we do not repeat them here.

*35 The Ninth Circuit reviews a district court’s order upholding the denial of disability benefits de novo. Reddick v. Chater, 157 F.3d 715, 720 (9th Cir.1998). The Commissioner’s decision must be affirmed if it was supported by substantial evidence and based on proper legal standards. Ukolov v. Barnhart, 420 F.3d 1002, 1004 (9th Cir.2005).

Kathy Martinez, the Appellant, argues that the Commissioner committed reversible error by failing to properly credit the opinions of her three treating physicians (Drs. Friend, Gregory and Scarmon). The Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) considered the opinions of Dr. Friend, and reasonably found that Dr. Friend’s opinions were consistent with Dr. Jordan’s opinions reflecting that Martinez is capable of “medium” work. See Sample v. Schweiker, 694 F.2d 639, 642 (9th Cir.1982) (“Where evidence is susceptible of more than one rational interpretation, it is the ALJ’s conclusion which must be upheld.”). The only opinion of Dr. Friend’s that Martinez argues was contradicted is the note Dr. Friend wrote just after her automobile…

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.