Court Opinion

ID: 9438550
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-03 05:46:38.360553+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:25:44.144573
License: Public Domain

MEMORANDUM *
Appellant Linda C. Viles challenges the district court’s judgment upholding Appellee Commissioner of Social Security’s determination that Viles was not disabled.
As the parties recognized during oral argument, this was a close case, with the record containing conflicting evidence regarding whether the claimant was disabled. When there are conflicting views of the medical evidence and the Administrative Law Judge selects one view over the other, our precedent mandates affirmance. See Tommasetti v. Astrue, 533 F.3d 1035, 1038 (9th Cir.2008) (recognizing that “[t]he court will uphold the ALJ’s conclusion when the evidence is susceptible to more than one rational interpretation”) (citations omitted).
AFFIRMED.

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.