FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
MAY 16 2017
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ERIC MICHAEL STOBIE, No. 16-35135
Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 3:15-cv-05539-MAT
v.
MEMORANDUM*
NANCY A. BERRYHILL,** Acting
Commissioner of Social Security,
Defendant-Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Washington
Mary A. Theiler, Magistrate Judge, Presiding
Submitted May 12, 2017***
Before: NELSON, TROTT and OWENS, Circuit Judges
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
** Nancy A. Berryhill is substituted for her predecessor as Acting
Commissioner of the Social Security Administration. Fed. R. App. P. 43(c)(2).
***
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
Eric Stobie appeals the district court’s order affirming the Commissioner of
Social Security’s denial of Stobie’s application for Title II disability insurance
benefits. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo,
Molina v. Astrue, 674 F.3d 1104, 1110 (9th Cir. 2012), and we affirm.
The ALJ’s credibility finding was not impermissibly general. The ALJ
identified the relevant testimony, immediately rejected the testimony as not
credible, discussed the relevant objective medical evidence, and summarized the
two reasons for rejecting the testimony. Brown-Hunter v. Colvin, 806 F.3d 487,
493 (9th Cir. 2015) (“[T]he ALJ must identify what testimony is not credible and
what evidence undermines the claimant’s complaints.” (citation and internal
quotation marks omitted)).
Nor did the ALJ’s credibility finding impermissibly rely exclusively on a
lack of medical evidence. The ALJ gave two specific and legitimate clear and
convincing reasons for rejecting Stobie’s testimony. First, there was insufficient
objective medical evidence to establish disability during the insured period. Burch
v. Barnhart, 400 F.3d 676, 681 (9th Cir. 2005) (“Although lack of medical
evidence cannot form the sole basis for discounting pain testimony, it is a factor
that the ALJ can consider in his credibility analysis.”). Second, Stobie’s subjective
symptom testimony conflicted with the objective medical evidence. Specifically,
2
the medical treatment records from the insured period and the months soon
thereafter demonstrated that Stobie’s symptoms were mild, and Stobie’s treating
physician opined that Stobie could perform sedentary work eight months after his
last insured date. Molina, 674 F.3d at 1113 (the ALJ can reject symptom
testimony that is inconsistent with the objective medical evidence); Ghanim v.
Colvin, 763 F.3d 1154, 1160 (9th Cir. 2014) (treating physician opinions are
entitled to the greatest weight).
AFFIRMED.
3