McClune v. Dudek
24-2911
9th Cir.Apr 14, 2025Background
- Martha McClune sought Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefits, citing lumbar degenerative disc disease, pelvic pain, and adjustment disorder with depressed mood.
- The ALJ denied her claim, ruling her mental impairment was nonsevere and did not significantly limit her ability to work.
- The district court upheld the ALJ’s decision; McClune appealed to the Ninth Circuit.
- On appeal, McClune argued the ALJ misapplied the psychiatric review technique (PRT) and improperly dismissed key medical opinion testimony.
- She also urged retroactive application of a June 2024 Social Security regulation changing the definition of "past relevant work."
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Severity of mental impairment (PRT) | ALJ cherry-picked evidence, ignored severity of impairment | ALJ properly weighed all evidence and resolved ambiguities | ALJ's finding supported by substantial evidence |
| Weight to Dr. Barua's mental health opinion | ALJ erred by disregarding Dr. Barua’s opinion | Dr. Barua’s opinion internally inconsistent; relied on self-report | ALJ properly discounted opinion; relied on objective records |
| ALJ's RFC discussion of mental impairments | ALJ failed to consider mental impairment in RFC | ALJ acknowledged nonsevere impairment in RFC assessment | No error; ALJ recognized and considered impairment |
| Retroactivity of new "past relevant work" rule | 2024 regulation should apply retroactively to this case | New rule only applies prospectively after June 2024 ALJ decisions | Declined to apply new rule retroactively |
Key Cases Cited
- Biestek v. Berryhill, 587 U.S. 97 (substantial evidence means such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept)
- Andrews v. Shalala, 53 F.3d 1035 (ALJ responsible for resolving conflicting or ambiguous medical testimony)
- Ukolov v. Barnhart, 420 F.3d 1002 (self-reported symptoms do not substitute for objective medical evidence)
- Rounds v. Comm’r Soc. Sec. Admin., 807 F.3d 996 (ALJ findings upheld if supported by reasonable inferences from record)
- Revels v. Berryhill, 874 F.3d 648 (court applies regulations in effect at time of final agency decision)