Romanelli

Romanelli v. Astrue

Good Law
267 F. App'x 722
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 25, 2008No. 06-35114California696 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM ***

Sydney Romanelli appeals the district court’s decision affirming the Commissioner of Social Security’s denial of disability insurance benefits. We review de novo a *724 district court’s order affirming the decision of an Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) to deny benefits. Batson v. Commissioner, 359 F.3d 1190,1193 (9th Cir.2004). We may set aside a denial of benefits only if it is based on legal error or not supported by substantial evidence. Id. Substantial evidence is relevant evidence which, considering the record as a whole, a reasonable person might accept as adequate to support a conclusion. Young v. Sullivan, 911 F.2d 180, 183 (9th Cir.1990). We affirm.

Ms. Romanelli asserts that the ALJ improperly rejected her subjective testimony along with the opinions of her treating physicians. When rejecting the opinion of a treating physician that is contradicted by the opinions of other physicians, an ALJ must “make findings setting forth specific, legitimate reasons for doing so that are based on substantial evidence in the record.” Sprague v. Bowen, 812 F.2d 1226, 1230 (9th Cir.1987).

The ALJ found that Ms. Romanelli suffered from fibromyalgia, but did not fully…

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.