Saul

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JERYKA ANN JOHNSON, Case No. 19-cv-06454-VC

Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S v. MOTION FOR SUMMARY

JUDGMENT, DENYING

ANDREW SAUL, DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR

SUMMARY JUDGMENT

Defendant. Re: Dkt. No. 19, 23

Jeryka Johnson contends that the ALJ improperly discounted the opinions of two of her treating physicians that, if accepted, would prove that Johnson is disabled and thus entitled to Supplemental Security Income and Child Disability Benefits. Johnson is correct at least as to Dr. Laxer, the only doctor who need be considered for purposes of these cross-motions for summary judgment. Treating physicians occupy the top rung in the hierarchy of expert opinion in social security cases. After all, the treating physician gains insight into the claimant’s medical limitations not from the vantage point of an expert assessing a claim for benefits, but as a doctor caring for a patient. Thus, even when not accorded “controlling weight” under the applicable regulation, 20 C.F.R. § 404.1527(c)(c), a treating physician’s opinion is “entitled to the greatest…