Case ID: f-appx_691/html/0435-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Felicia JOHNSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Nancy A. BERRYHILL, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant-Appellee.
    No. 15-35921
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted May 22, 2017 
    
    Filed May 24, 2017
    Merrill Schneider, Attorney, Schneider Kerr & Robichaux, Portland, OR, for Plaintiff-Appellant
    Thomas M. Elsberry, Esquire, Special Assistant U.S. Attorney, SSA — Social Security Administration, Seattle, WA, Janice Elaine Hebert, Assistant U.S. Attorney, DOJ-USAO, Portland, OR, for Defendant-Appellee
    Before: D.W. NELSON, TROTT, and OWENS, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2),
    
   MEMORANDUM

Felicia Johnson appeals the district court’s decision affirming the Commissioner of Social Security’s denial of her application for supplemental security income under Title XVI of the Social Security Act. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we review de novo. Ghanim v. Colvin, 763 F.3d 1154, 1159 (9th Cir. 2014). We affirm the district court’s judgment.

The administrative law judge (“ALJ”) did not err in according “little weight” to the contradicted opinion of Lucí Carstens, Ph.D., an examining psychologist. The ALJ provided a specific and legitimate reason, supported by substantial evidence, for discounting Dr. Carstens’s opinion by explaining that Johnson did not fully disclose her drug and alcohol use to Dr. Car-stens, and in particular did not mention a relapse in 2009. See Garrison v. Colvin, 759 F.3d 995, 1012 (9th Cir. 2014). Any error in the other two reasons provided by the ALJ was harmless. See Molina v. Astrue, 674 F.3d 1104, 1122 (9th Cir. 2012).

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.