Court Opinion

ID: 9436653
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-03 02:54:19.995494+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:24:21.867612
License: Public Domain

IKUTA, Circuit Judge,
dissenting:
Although I agree with most of the majority’s analysis, I dissent from the conclusion that the ALJ’s failure to address Dr. Wheeler’s opinion was harmless. Under Social Security Ruling 96-8p, the ALJ is required to consider all of a claimant’s functional limitations or restrictions. Furthermore, failure to address a particular limitation invalidates an ALJ’s determination of residual functional capacity, as such determination is not supported by substantial evidence. See Reddick v. Chater, 157 F.3d 715, 724-25 (9th Cir.1998). Although the ALJ might properly have discredited Dr. Wheeler’s opinion based on the conflicting opinion of Dr. Price or inconsistencies within Dr. Wheeler’s own opinion, the ALJ provided no such reasons, and I cannot conclude on the record before us that such error was harmless.
Based on this error, I would remand to the ALJ for reassessment of Zettelmier’s residual functional capacity.