102 F.4th 1102
9th Cir.2024Background
- Lorain Ann Stiffler applied for Social Security disability benefits based on ADHD, depression, mood disorder, right knee problems, and a processing disorder, but was denied at all administrative levels.
- The main period under review starts January 5, 2018; Stiffler was evaluated by her treating psychiatrist (Dr. Khosh-Chashm) and state agency medical consultants (Dr. Goldberg and Dr. Bilik).
- Dr. Khosh-Chashm identified "extreme" mental and cognitive limitations, but state consultants found only "moderate" limitations and concluded Stiffler could perform simple, non-public work.
- Stiffler testified to significant functional limitations due to depression and intellectual disability, but the ALJ found her reported daily activities inconsistent with extreme impairment.
- The ALJ limited Stiffler to simple, routine, low-stress work and ruled she could perform certain jobs identified by a vocational expert; the district court affirmed this decision.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| ALJ's rejection of Dr. Khosh-Chashm's opinion | ALJ improperly disregarded treating doctor’s disabling opinion | ALJ correctly found the opinion inconsistent/unsupported | ALJ’s rejection supported by substantial evidence |
| Consistency/supportability of medical opinions | ALJ failed to properly weigh treating doctor vs. agency doctors | Supportability and consistency factors support agency opinions | ALJ properly applied regulatory factors; substantial evidence |
| Vocational evidence/Reasoning Level conflict | Limitation to "few workplace changes" conflicts with Level 2 | No conflict; Level 2 addresses task variables, not environment | No apparent conflict; ALJ's job findings affirmed |
| Harmless error re: Level 3 (mail clerk) job | Inclusion of Level 3 Reasoning job not harmless error | Sufficient jobs at Level 2 remain, so error is harmless | Error in including mail clerk job harmless; enough other jobs |
Key Cases Cited
- Smartt v. Kijakazi, 53 F.4th 489 (9th Cir. 2022) (standard for setting aside Social Security denials)
- Ford v. Saul, 950 F.3d 1141 (9th Cir. 2020) (definition of substantial evidence and deference to ALJ)
- Woods v. Kijakazi, 32 F.4th 785 (9th Cir. 2022) (factors for weighing medical opinions under new regs)
- Zavalin v. Colvin, 778 F.3d 842 (9th Cir. 2015) (conflicts between vocational expert testimony and DOT)
- Rounds v. Comm’r Soc. Sec. Admin., 807 F.3d 996 (9th Cir. 2015) (DOT Reasoning Levels and Social Security claims)