FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION OCT 17 2014
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
LORI LECLAIR, No. 13-16204
Plaintiff - Appellant, D.C. No. 2:12-CV-00655-SRB
v.
MEMORANDUM*
CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Commissioner
of Social Security,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
Susan R. Bolton, District Judge, Presiding
Argued and Submitted October 6, 2014
Phoenix, Arizona
Before: D.W. NELSON, SILVERMAN, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Lori LeClair appeals the district court’s order affirming the decision of the
Commissioner of the Social Security Administration denying her Social Security
disability insurance and supplemental security income benefits. We have
jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
The ALJ provided clear and convincing reasons, supported by substantial
evidence, to support his decision to give little weight to the treating physician’s
opinion. Dr. Easton’s medical assessment did not cite objective evidence
supporting the limitations imposed. Thomas v. Barnhart, 278 F.3d 947, 957 (9th
Cir. 2002). Moreover, the record as a whole supports the ALJ’s determination that
LeClair’s condition improved following her hip replacement surgeries. Moncada
v. Chater, 60 F.3d 521, 523 (9th Cir. 1995) (per curiam). Finally, substantial
evidence supports the ALJ’s conclusion that Dr. Easton based her assessment on
LeClair’s subjective complaints. Tommasetti v. Astrue, 533 F.3d 1036, 1041 (9th
Cir. 2008).
The ALJ properly provided the vocational expert with LeClair’s limitations
and restrictions based on the entirety of the evidence in the record. Tackett v.
Apfel, 180 F.3d 1094, 1101 (9th Cir. 1999); Embrey v. Bowen, 849 F.2d 418, 422
(9th Cir. 1988).
The district court did not err in affirming the denial of benefits.
AFFIRMED.
-2-