1

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

SUSAN BURNAROOS,

 Plaintiff - Appellant,

 v.

CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Commissioner of 

Social Security,

 Defendant - Appellee.

No. 13-35952

D.C. No. 2:12-cv-03073-JTR

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Washington

John Tyler Rodgers, Magistrate Judge, Presiding

Submitted July 10, 2015**

Seattle, Washington

Before: NGUYEN and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges and ZOUHARY,*** District 

Judge.

Susan Burnaroos appeals the district court’s affirmance of the 

 

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not 

precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for 

decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

*** The Honorable Jack Zouhary, District Judge for the U.S. District 

Court for the Northern District of Ohio, sitting by designation.

FILED

JUL 21 2015

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2

Commissioner’s denial of Social Security and Supplemental Security Income 

disability benefits. We review the district court’s order de novo and the 

Commissioner’s denial of benefits for substantial evidence. Molina v. Astrue, 674 

F.3d 1104, 1110 (9th Cir. 2012). We affirm. 

1. The Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) gave germane reasons for 

disregarding the Mental Medical Source Statement of Nina Rapisarda, M.S.W. See 

Turner v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 613 F.3d 1217, 1224 (9th Cir. 2010). Substantial 

evidence supported the ALJ’s conclusions that Burnaroos’s condition improved 

during 2009 and 2010, and that her complaints about agoraphobia and paranoia 

symptoms resolved over time and were inconsistent with her activities of daily 

living.

2. The ALJ did not fail to consider evidence from Shahm Martini, M.D., Jay 

Toews, Ed.D., Billy Nordyke, D.O., and Sandra Birdlebough, A.R.N.P. The ALJ 

specifically considered and cited the documents containing their opinions, and 

discussed Nordyke and Birdlebough’s documents at length. 

3. The ALJ provided specific, clear and convincing reasons for disbelieving 

Burnaroos’s statements regarding the intensity of her symptoms. See Molina, 674 

F.3d at 1112. Burnaroos’s symptoms improved with treatment, and her daily living 

activities were inconsistent with her statements about symptom intensity. See id. at 

1112-13. Because the ALJ’s reasons were supported by the record, any other error 
3

by the ALJ with respect to Burnaroos’s credibility was harmless. See Carmickle v. 

Comm’r, Soc. Sec. Admin., 533 F.3d 1155, 1162-63 (9th Cir. 2008).

4. Although the ALJ incorrectly concluded that there was no record support 

for a diagnosis of ADHD, this error was harmless because substantial evidence 

supported the ALJ’s conclusion that Burnaroos’s ADHD was not a severe 

impairment. Specifically, Dr. Klein testified that the medical record was not 

consistent with a diagnosis of ADHD, and the ALJ could reasonably conclude that 

Burnaroos’s decision to not take ADHD medications for a period of time suggests 

her symptoms were not severe. Cf. Tommasetti v. Astrue, 533 F.3d 1035, 1039 (9th 

Cir. 2008) (concluding that a claimant’s decision to stop taking medicine undercut 

his testimony that his condition was debilitating).

5. The ALJ did not err in concluding that Burnaroos can do work she did in 

the past as a housekeeper and fast food worker. Burnaroos’s time as a housekeeper 

was past relevant work because it occurred during the last 15 years, was substantial 

gainful activity, and lasted long enough for her to learn to do it. See 20 C.F.R. § 

404.1560(b)(1). There was also no error in the hypothetical that the ALJ posed to 

the vocational expert, which adequately addressed Burnaroos’s difficulties 

interacting with the general public and responding to supervisors. See Bayliss v. 

Barnhart, 427 F.3d 1211, 1217 (9th Cir. 2005) (stating that an ALJ’s hypothetical 

must contain the limitations that an ALJ finds credible and supported by substantial 
4

evidence). 

AFFIRMED.