Bertha Gabriela Garcia v. Nancy A. Berryhill, 2:18-cv-07927

Plaintiff Bertha G.G. applied for Disability Insurance Benefits and SSI alleging disability beginning September 15, 2009; claims were denied initially and on reconsideration.
Administrative hearing held July 18, 2017; ALJ Christopher R. Daniels issued decision August 29, 2017 finding claimant not disabled; Appeals Council denied review and plaintiff sought district court review.
ALJ found severe impairments: recurrent kidney stones, depression, and PTSD, and assessed an RFC for light work with limits to simple, routine, repetitive tasks, occasional coworker/supervisor interaction, no public contact, and ability to adapt to routine changes.
Vocational expert testified and ALJ concluded plaintiff could perform jobs existing in significant numbers (mail clerk, laundry sorter, marking clerk); claimant could not perform past relevant work.
Consultative examiner Dr. Bahaa Grigis issued an opinion limiting plaintiff to less-than-sedentary work based on left leg weakness and unsteady gait; plaintiff argued the ALJ failed to give clear and convincing reasons to reject that opinion.
The ALJ gave Dr. Grigis’s opinion little weight as inconsistent with numerous objective medical records and noting functional improvement after obesity (lap-band) surgery; the district court affirmed the ALJ and dismissed the action with prejudice.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the ALJ provided clear and convincing reasons to reject the consultative examiner’s sedentary RFC opinion	ALJ’s statement that the opinion "is inconsistent with the claimant’s physical objective findings" is boilerplate and not a specific, clear and convincing reason; Grigis’s opinion is supported by hospital records and a state physician	ALJ properly gave little weight: cited numerous medical records inconsistent with extreme limitations and noted post-surgery improvement enabling standing/walking; many records post-dated the earlier opinion and the ALJ relied on the whole record	Court held ALJ provided adequate reasons; little weight to Grigis was supported by substantial evidence; decision affirmed

Garrison v. Colvin, 759 F.3d 995 (9th Cir. 2014) (scope of district court review of ALJ decision)
Lester v. Chater, 81 F.3d 821 (9th Cir. 1995) (standard for rejecting an uncontradicted treating or examining physician opinion)
Trevizo v. Berryhill, 871 F.3d 664 (9th Cir. 2017) (when contradicted, ALJ must give specific and legitimate reasons to reject a physician’s opinion)
Burrell v. Colvin, 775 F.3d 1133 (9th Cir. 2014) (ALJ may reject opinions that are brief, conclusory, or unsupported by the record)
Tommasetti v. Astrue, 533 F.3d 1035 (9th Cir. 2008) (inconsistency with the record is a legitimate reason to discount an opinion)
Brown-Hunter v. Colvin, 806 F.3d 487 (9th Cir. 2015) (harmless-error standard for ALJ decisions)
Ryan v. Commissioner of Social Security, 528 F.3d 1194 (9th Cir. 2008) (court must uphold ALJ when evidence supports more than one rational interpretation)
Reddick v. Chater, 157 F.3d 715 (9th Cir. 1998) (ALJ meets substantial-evidence requirement by setting out detailed summary of facts and conflicting evidence)