Michael Hocevar, III v. Kilolo Kijakazi, 20-36069

Michael J. Hocevar III sought Supplemental Security Income; an ALJ denied benefits and the district court affirmed; Hocevar appealed to the Ninth Circuit.
The ALJ discounted Hocevar’s subjective symptom testimony, citing inconsistencies with his daily activities (sole custody of a 12-year-old, driving, cooking, attending school conferences, exercising, playing pool) and conservative treatment (homeopathic and OTC remedies).
The ALJ gave reduced weight to psychologist Dr. Alvord’s opinion because it conflicted with objective testing and appeared grounded largely in Hocevar’s subjective reports.
The ALJ gave little weight to neuropsychologist Dr. Taubenfeld’s opinion, citing possible manipulation of test results and inconsistencies with other evidence, but did not identify specific, legitimate reasons supported by the record for doing so.
The Ninth Circuit affirmed the ALJ’s credibility and Dr. Alvord rulings but vacated the rejection of Dr. Taubenfeld’s opinion and remanded for further proceedings; Judge Bumatay dissented on the harmless-error point.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether ALJ properly discounted Hocevar’s symptom testimony	ALJ improperly discredited subjective complaints	ALJ permissibly relied on inconsistent daily activities and conservative treatment	Affirmed — specific, clear, convincing reasons supported by substantial evidence
Whether ALJ properly rejected Dr. Alvord’s opinion	ALJ erred in discounting a treating/consultative opinion	Opinion conflicted with objective exam findings and relied on claimant’s reports	Affirmed — contradictions with record and reliance on claimant justified discounting
Whether ALJ properly rejected Dr. Taubenfeld’s opinion	ALJ failed to provide specific, legitimate reasons supported by substantial evidence	Commissioner contends errors were harmless because doctors’ opinions were similar	Vacated and remanded — failure to give specific reasons was not harmless error (majority); Bumatay dissent would find harmless

Ghanim v. Colvin, 763 F.3d 1154 (9th Cir. 2014) (standard of review and limits on relief)
Molina v. Astrue, 674 F.3d 1104 (9th Cir. 2012) (standards for evaluating symptom testimony)
Lingenfelter v. Astrue, 504 F.3d 1028 (9th Cir. 2007) (daily activities as factor in credibility)
Parra v. Astrue, 481 F.3d 742 (9th Cir. 2007) (conservative treatment as a reason to discount severity)
Tommasetti v. Astrue, 533 F.3d 1035 (9th Cir. 2008) (rejecting medical opinion that conflicts with medical record)
Buck v. Berryhill, 869 F.3d 1040 (9th Cir. 2017) (discounting opinions premised on claimant’s discredited reports)
Ryan v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 528 F.3d 1194 (9th Cir. 2008) (requirement for specific and legitimate reasons to reject medical opinion)
Marsh v. Colvin, 792 F.3d 1170 (9th Cir. 2015) (harmless error standard in disability context)
Robbins v. Soc. Sec. Admin., 466 F.3d 880 (9th Cir. 2006) (materiality of erroneous credibility findings)
Treichler v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec. Admin., 775 F.3d 1090 (9th Cir. 2014) (when unresolved conflicts require remand)
Valentine v. Comm’r Soc. Sec. Admin., 574 F.3d 685 (9th Cir. 2009) (assessing lay witness testimony and connection to claimant’s statements)