Court Opinion

ID: 9799520
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 07:15:00.191124+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:19:48.481128
License: Public Domain

KLEINFELD, Senior Circuit Judge,
dissenting:
I respectfully dissent. Substantial evidence supports the ALJ’s findings as to Klahn’s credibility and the limited weight given to Klahn’s treating and examining physicians. See Flaten v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 44 F.3d 1453, 1457 (9th Cir.1995).
Klahn’s argument under Lounsburry v. Barnhart, 468 F.3d 1111 (9th Cir.2006) ought to be treated as waived because she did not raise it in her opening brief. Klahn first made this argument in a Rule 28(j) letter citing Lounsburry, but that case was decided six years before she submitted her brief on the merits. Klahn has offered no excuse for making an entirely new argument after briefing. See United States v. Gomez-Mendez, 486 F.3d 599, 606 n. 10 (9th Cir.2007).