Court Opinion

ID: 9837894
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-02 03:58:46.395785+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:45:32.433286
License: Public Domain

KLEINFELD, Senior Circuit Judge,
dissenting:
I would affirm. Social Security Ruling 12-2p mandated that the ALJ should compare objective medical evidence to Hamilton-Carneal’s subjective complaints. Though laboratory tests may not be useful to diagnose fibromyalgia, see Benecke v. Barnhart, 379 F.3d 587, 590 (9th Cir. 2004), there was objective medical evidence contradicting Hamilton-Carneal’s testimony. For example, Hamilton-Car-neal’s treating rheumatologists observed she had a normal gait, full range of motion, and no weakness in her hands. Neurological testing confirmed her full musculoskel-etal functioning. And Hamilton-Carneal demonstrated tenderness in only ten out of eighteen points, below the threshold for a fibromyalgia diagnosis according to the agency’s standards. See SSR 12-2p. Though we review the district court de novo, we should not ignore the district court’s cogent reasons for affirming the ALJ.