Peck

AMENDED MEMORANDUM *

The ALJ’s conclusion that Peck does not suffer from a severe mental impairment is supported by substantial evi *584 dence on the record as a whole. See Andrews v. Shalala, 53 F.3d 1035, 1040 (9th Cir.1995). The ALJ permissibly credited the opinion of one treating physician, Dr. Hortareas, over that of another, Dr. Soscia. Dr. Soscia is an orthopedic surgeon whose treatment focused on an orthopedic problem, and his opinion was based on Peck’s subjective descriptions of his symptoms and was provided in a conclusionary check-off form, unsupported by clinical findings. See Magallanes v. Bowen, 881 F.2d 747, 751 (9th Cir.1989). Dr. Hortareas, on the other hand, is a physician who has treated Peck’s depression and anxiety with medication for several years, reporting steady improvement. In these circumstances, the ALJ did not err in crediting Dr. Hortareas’s opinion over that of Dr. Soscia.

The ALJ’s conclusion as to Peck’s ability to perform his past relevant work is not supported by substantial evidence on the record as a whole. Specifically, the ALJ erred in crediting the opinion of the examining physician, Dr. Barker, over that of Dr. Soscia. See Magallanes,…