T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by 9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pa ne l una ni m ous l yf i nds thi s c a s e s ui t abl e f

orde c i s i on w i thout ** o r a l a r g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T D EBRA A . LEI TN ER, P la in tif

f - A p p e lla n t, v. COM M I SS I ON ERSOCI AL SE CURI TY AD MI NI S T R AT I ON , D ef

endant- A pp el l ee . N o. 08- 36030 D . C. N o . 1 : 0 7 - c v - 0 1 5 0 0 - CL ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt

f orthe D i s tr i c tof

O r e gon M ark D . C l a rke , M a gi s tr a t e J udge , P r e s i di ng S ubm i tt e d D e c e m be r11, 2009 ** P ort l a nd, O r e gon B efo re: F A R R IS , D . W . N E L S O N an d B E R Z O N , C i rcu i tJu d g es. A n arro w q u est i o n w as p resen t ed fo r rev i ew . Iti s n o td i sp u t ed th atM s. L e i tne rs uf

f e r s f r om de pr e s s i on w i th a nxi e ty . T he que s t i on i s the s e ve r i tya nd funct i on al l i m i t at i on s a ttri bu t abl e t o h erdepres si on and n ec k p ai n. Iti s argued that 

# FI LED JAN 08 2 010 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS2

the S oc i a l S e c ur i ty C om m i s s i one r ’ s de ni a l of M s . L e i tne r ’ s appl i c a t i on f or D i sabi l i ty I nsurance Benefi t s i s nei ther s up po rt ed by subst ant i al evi dence nor fre e of l egal error. T he pi vot a l i s s ue i s w he the rthe A dm i ni s tr a t i ve L a w J udge s houl d ha ve o b ta in e d ac o n s u lta tiv e e x a m in a tio n to a s s e s s M s . L e itn e r ’s d e p r e s s io n w ith anxi ety bef

ore c on cl ud i ng thather c on di t i on w as no tse vere . A l tho ug h the re cord i ncl ud es m edi ca l re po rt s dat i ng back t o 1 99 4, L ei tner a m ended h eral l eged on se t da t e t o J ul y 16, 2005. A ft era r evi ew of al l re l evantm edi ca l i nform at i on the A L J det erm i ned that b ased o n L ei tn er’ s resi d u al fu n ct i o n al cap aci ty, sh e co u l d p erfo rm w o rkas a c a s hi e r , dr i ve r , orf

l a gge r . H e c onc l ude d tha tL e i tne rw a s notdi s abl e d. T he r e w a s no e rr or . N othi ng i ndi c a t e s tha tthe A L Js houl d ha ve or de r e d a c ons ul t a t i ve e xa m t o a s s e s s M s . L e i tne r ’ s de pr e s s i on a nd a nxi e ty . T he c l a i m a nt b e a r s th e b u r d e n to s h o w th a t h e rim p a irm e n t o rth e irs y m p to m s a f f e c t h e rab ility t o “ perf orm basi c w ork act i vi t i es . ” E d lu n d v . M a s s a n a r i, 253 F . 3d 1152, 1159- 60 (9 th C ir. 2 0 0 1 ). O n th is re co rd , th e A L J c o u ldp ro p er ly d eter m in e th at L eitn er ’s de pr e s s i on w a s nots e ve r e . H e rl a c k of c ouns e l i ng, the l a c k of

ar e c om m e nda t i on for c ou nsel i ng , her l ac k o f hospi t al i za t i on , and h ervo l un t ary di sc on t i nu ance of her3

m edi ca t i on w er e f

ac t ors thatcoul d p roperl y be c on si dere d. S ee B u rch v. B a rn h a rt , 400 F . 3d 676, 681 ( 9th C i r . 2005) . T he A L J ’ s duty t o de ve l op the r e c or d i s tr i gge r e d i f the r e i s a m bi guous e v id e n c e o rth e r e c o r d is in a d e q u a te f o rp r o p e re v a lu a tio n o f

e v id e n c e . N e ith e ris tru e h e r e . L ei tner a l so ar gu es thatthe A L J e rr ed i n rej ec t i ng her c om pl ai nt s f o n ec k pa i n on the ba s i s of

he ra c t i vi t i e s be f

or e he rons e tda t e . H e r2003 a nd 2004 a c tiv itie s w e r e n o t, h o w e v e r , p iv o ta l in th e d e te rm in a tio n o f la c ko f c r e d ib ility . See Carm i ckle v . C om m ’r , 53 3 F . 3d 15 5, 11 65 (9th C i r. 20 08 ). M oreover, they are r e le v a n t u n le s s L e itn e rp r o v e s h e rc o n d itio n h a s w o r s e n e d . See Fai r v . B ow en , 885 F . 2d 59 7, 60 0 (9th C i r. 19 89 ). In re ac hi ng a c on cl usi on , the A L J poi nt ed ou tthat there w as no evi dence of any w orse ni ng of her pai n and det erm i ned thather a s s e rtio n o f

w o r s e n in g is u n s u b s ta n tia te d . W e d o n o ti g n o re M s. L ei tn er’ s rel i an ce o n sev eral M R I resu l t s sh o w i n g d i sc bul ge s a nd he rni a t i ons f r om O c t obe r2006. A s the A L Jnot e d, L e i tne rha s no dem on strabl e neurali m pi ng em entor ce ntra l canal st enosi s i n the al l eged w orse ni ng of her c on di t i on . N orm al w ear and t ear m i l d d egenerat i ve changes ar e t o be e xpe c t e d. T he A L Jj us t i f i abl yr e l i e d on e vi de nc e of he rc ondi t i on pr i ort o the a lle g e d o n s e t d a te . H e c ite d s p e c if ic r e a s o n s f

o rn o t g iv in g L e itn e r ’s te s tim o n yf u ll4

c r e d i b i l i ty . T h e AL J ’ s h yp o th e t i c a l s we r e s u p p o rt e d b ys u b s t a n t i a l e v i d e n c e . He c o n s id e r e d a ll m e d ic a l o p in io n s a n d im p a irm e n ts . A n A L Jis “n o t r e q u ir e d to di sc uss e verypi ec e of e vi dence. ” H o w a rd v. B a rn h a rt , 3 4 1 F .3 d 1 0 0 6 , 1 0 1 2 ( 9 th C i r . 2003) . A m e di c a l opi ni on tha ti s i nc ons i s t e ntw i th ac l a i m a nt ’ s a c t i vi t i e s of d a ilyliv in g n e e d n o t b e c o n s id e r e d c o n tr o llin g . W e have care ful l y c on si dere d L ei tner’ s a l l egat i on s. T he re cord ref l ec t s that th e A L Jp r o p e r lyc o m p a r e d h e rr e s id u a l f u n c tio n in g c ap a c ityto h e rp r io rw o rk . T he vo ca t i on al expertre cogn i ze d h erl i m i t at i on s w hen h e i nd i ca t ed j ob s thatw er e ap p r o p r ia te f

o rh e r . S u b s ta n tia l e v id e n c e s u p p o rts th e A L J ’s f in d in g th a t L e itn e ris notdi s abl e d. AF F I R ME D.