Case Name: Bonnie May HAMILTON-CARNEAL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Carolyn W. COLVIN, Commissioner of Social Security Administration, Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2016-11-10
Citations: 670 F. App'x 613
Docket Number: No. 14-15398
Parties: Bonnie May HAMILTON-CARNEAL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Carolyn W. COLVIN, Commissioner of Social Security Administration, Defendant-Appellee.
Judges: Before: KLEINFELD, RAWLINSON, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 670
Pages: 613–614

Head Matter:
Bonnie May HAMILTON-CARNEAL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Carolyn W. COLVIN, Commissioner of Social Security Administration, Defendant-Appellee.
No. 14-15398
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted March 14, 2016 San Francisco, California
Filed November 10, 2016
Mark Ross Caldwell, Mark Caldwell, P.C., Phoenix, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellant
Pamela Margaret Wood, Special Assistant U.S. Attorney, Danielle A. Pedderson, SSA-Social Security Administration, Office of the Regional Chief Counsel, Denver, CO, for Defendant-Appellee
Before: KLEINFELD, RAWLINSON, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Bonnie May Hamilton-Carneal appeals the district court's order affirming the denial by the Commissioner of Social Security of her application for disability insurance benefits. We vacate and remand with instructions to remand to the agency for further proceedings.
1. Hamilton-Carneal was diagnosed with fibromyalgia by her treating physician. Fi-bromyalgia "is poorly-understood within much of the medical community." Benecke v. Barnhart, 379 F.3d 587, 590 (9th Cir. 2004). "The disease is diagnosed entirely on the basis of patients' reports of pain and other symptoms;" "there are no laboratory tests to confirm the diagnosis." Id.; see also Rounds v. Comm'r, 807 F.3d 996, 1000 n.3 (9th Cir. 2015). The ALJ therefore erred by discounting Hamilton-Car-neal's "subjective complaints and limitations" as "simply out of proportion to and not corroborated by the objective medical evidence."
2. The ALJ provided other reasons for discounting Hamilton-Carneal's reports of pain. For example, she noted that Hamilton-Carneal "voluntarily deferred recommended treatment." See Tommasetti v. Astrue, 533 F.3d 1035, 1039 (9th Cir. 2008) (affirming an ALJ's decision to discredit pain testimony in part because the claimant did not "seek an aggressive treatment program"). We therefore decline to credit Hamilton-Carneal's testimony as true. See Dominguez v. Colvin, 808 F.3d 403, 407 (9th Cir. 2016). But the ALJ's decision indicates that the absence of "objective medical evidence" was a central factor in her determination that Hamilton-Carneal was not credible. We also therefore cannot conclude that the error was harmless. See Carmickle v. Comm'r, 533 F.3d 1155, 1162 (9th Cir. 2008); Stout v. Comm'r, 454 F.3d 1050, 1056 (9th Cir. 2006).
VACATED. AND REMANDED. Each party shall bear its own costs.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R, 36-3,