Cases pin-citing cluster 762175 · Go Syfert
Search » Famous passages » Cases pin-citing cluster 762175

Cases pin-citing cluster 762175

 ·  1999  ·  34 pinpoint citations from 34 cases, 33 distinct passages.

Sheppard v. Commissioner of Social Security  ·  2025-09-24  ·  W.D. Washington  ·  pin 169 F.3d at 595
“Where the evidence is susceptible to 8 more than one rational interpretation, it is the ALJ's conclusion that must be upheld.”
Giese v. Bisignano  ·  2025-09-15  ·  E.D. Washington  ·  pin 169 F.3d at 595
“A physician's opinion of disability premised to a large 16 extent upon the claimant's own accounts of his symptoms and limitations may be 17 disregarded where those complaints have been properly discounted.”
Tibbits v. Commissioner of Social Security  ·  2025-05-09  ·  W.D. Washington  ·  pin 169 F.3d at 595
“Where the evidence is susceptible to more than one rational 22 interpretation, it is the ALJ's conclusion that must be upheld.”
Gray v. O'Malley  ·  2025-03-17  ·  N.D. California  ·  pin 169 F.3d at 595
“The inclusion of the ALJ’s personal 27 observations does not render the decision improper.”
Fisher v. Commissioner of Social Security  ·  2025-02-27  ·  W.D. Washington  ·  pin 169 F.3d at 595
“Where the evidence is susceptible to more than one rational interpretation, it is 19 the ALJ's conclusion that must be upheld.”
Branham v. Commissioner of Social Security  ·  2025-02-24  ·  W.D. Washington  ·  pin 169 F.3d at 595
“Where the evidence is susceptible to more than one rational 7 interpretation, it is the ALJ's conclusion that must be upheld.”
Robinson v. Commissioner of Social Security  ·  2025-02-10  ·  W.D. Washington  ·  pin 169 F.3d at 595
“Where the evidence is susceptible to more than one rational 8 interpretation, it is the ALJ's conclusion that must be upheld.”
Copeland v. Commissioner of Social Security  ·  2024-12-31  ·  W.D. Washington  ·  pin 169 F.3d at 595
“Where the evidence is 15 susceptible to more than one rational interpretation, it is the ALJ's conclusion that must be 16 upheld.”
Nichols v. Commissioner of Social Security  ·  2024-09-25  ·  W.D. Washington  ·  pin 169 F.3d at 595
“Where the evidence is susceptible to more than one rational 20 interpretation, it is the ALJ's conclusion that must be upheld.”
Jackson v. Commissioner of Social Security  ·  2024-08-12  ·  W.D. Washington  ·  pin 169 F.3d at 595
“Where the evidence is susceptible to more than one rational 9 interpretation, it is the ALJ's conclusion that must be upheld.”
Smith v. Commissioner of Social Security  ·  2024-06-21  ·  W.D. Washington  ·  pin 169 F.3d at 595
“Where the evidence is susceptible to more than one rational interpretation, it is 23 the ALJ's conclusion that must be upheld.”
Riggins v. Kijakazi  ·  2023-08-16  ·  E.D. Washington  ·  pin 169 F.3d at 595
“[Q]uestions of credibility and resolutions of conflicts in the testimony are 21 1 functions solely of the [Commissioner].”
Lejon v. Commissioner of Social Security  ·  2023-08-11  ·  W.D. Washington  ·  pin 169 F.3d at 595
“[W]hen evidence is susceptible to more than one rational interpretation, the ALJ’s 3 conclusion must be upheld.”
(SS) McNabb v. Commissioner of Social Security  ·  2023-06-20  ·  E.D. California  ·  pin 169 F.3d at 595
“Citing the conflict between Morgan’s testimony of subjective complaints 7 and the objective medical evidence in the record, and noting the ALJ’s personal observations, the 8 ALJ provided specific and substantial reasons that undermined Morgan’s credibility.”
(SS) Neri v. Commissioner of Social Security  ·  2023-01-26  ·  E.D. California  ·  pin 169 F.3d at 595
“Citing the conflict between Morgan’s testimony of subjective 25 complaints and the objective medical evidence in the record, and noting the ALJ’s personal 26 observations, the ALJ provided specific and substantial reasons that undermined Morgan’s 27 credibility.”
Zamora v. Commissioner of Social Security  ·  2022-11-30  ·  W.D. Washington  ·  pin 169 F.3d at 595
“Where the evidence is susceptible to more than one rational interpretation, it is 4 the ALJ’s conclusion that must be upheld.”
Garcia v. Commissioner Social Security Administration  ·  2022-10-11  ·  D. Oregon  ·  pin 169 F.3d at 595
“the opinion of a nonexamining medical advisor cannot by itself constitute substantial evidence that justifies the rejection of the opinion of an examining or treating physician”
(SS) Limon v. Commissioner of Social Security  ·  2022-04-25  ·  E.D. California  ·  pin 169 F.3d at 595
“Where, as here, the ALJ has made specific findings justifying a decision to 15 disbelieve an allegation . . . and those findings are supported by substantial evidence in the 16 record, our role is not to second-guess that decision.”
Clayton v. Commissioner of Social Security  ·  2021-03-09  ·  W.D. Washington  ·  pin 169 F.3d at 595
“Where the evidence is susceptible to more than one rational 12 interpretation, it is the ALJ’s conclusion that must be upheld.”
Tracey Singleton v. Kilolo Kijakazi  ·  2021-02-03  ·  C.D. California  ·  pin 169 F.3d at 595
“Where 28 the evidence is susceptible to more than one rational interpretation, it is the ALJ’s 1 conclusion that must be upheld.”
Martinez v. Commissioner of Social Security  ·  2021-01-27  ·  W.D. Washington  ·  pin 169 F.3d at 595
“Where the evidence is susceptible to more than one rational interpretation, it is 5 the ALJ’s conclusion that must be upheld.”
(SS) Michael Digiacomo v. Commissioner of Social Security  ·  2020-10-28  ·  E.D. California  ·  pin 169 F.3d at 595
“Where, as here, the ALJ has made specific findings 2 justifying a decision to disbelieve an allegation . . . and those findings are supported by substantial 3 evidence in the record, our role is not to second-guess that decision.”
(SS) (CONSENT) Knight v. Commissioner of Social Security  ·  2020-09-14  ·  E.D. California  ·  pin 169 F.3d at 595
“The opinion of a 20 nonexamining medical advisor cannot by itself constitute substantial evidence that justifies the 21 rejection of the opinion of an examining or treating physician.”
Nicole M Castro v. Nancy A. Berryhill  ·  2020-01-07  ·  C.D. California  ·  pin 169 F.3d at 595
“If a claimant is able to spend a substantial part of 28 his day engaged in pursuits involving the performance of physical 1 functions that are transferable to a work setting, a specific finding as 2 to this fact may be sufficient to discredit a claimant’s allegations.”
Evan Shadle v. Nancy A. Berryhill  ·  2019-12-18  ·  C.D. California  ·  pin 169 F.3d at 595
“If a claimant is able to spend a substantial part of his day 23 engaged in pursuits involving the performance of physical functions that 24 are transferable to a work setting, a specific finding as to this fact 25 may be sufficient to discredit a claimant’s allegations.”
Baumann v. Commissioner of Social Security  ·  2019-10-28  ·  W.D. Washington  ·  pin 169 F.3d at 595
“Where the evidence is susceptible to more than one rational interpretation, it is the 17 ALJ’s conclusion that must be upheld.”
Isham v. Commissioner of Social Security  ·  2019-10-21  ·  W.D. Washington  ·  pin 169 F.3d at 595
“Where the evidence is susceptible to more than one rational 15 interpretation, it is the ALJ’s conclusion that must be upheld.”
Carew v. Berryhill  ·  2019-09-23  ·  D. Idaho  ·  pin 169 F.3d at 595
“Mental status examination in January was normal, with good mood and full affect.”
(SS) Boisclaire v. Commissioner of Social Security  ·  2019-09-18  ·  E.D. California  ·  pin 169 F.3d at 595
“Opinions of a nonexamining, testifying medical advisor may serve as substantial 25 evidence when they are supported by other evidence in the record and are consistent with it.”
Juan Ceja Solorzano v. Nancy A. Berryhill  ·  2019-08-22  ·  C.D. California  ·  pin 169 F.3d at 595
“The inclusion of the ALJ’s personal 21 observations does not render the decision improper.”
Diana Pitts v. Nancy A. Berryhill  ·  2019-08-16  ·  C.D. California  ·  pin 169 F.3d at 595
“If a claimant is able to spend a substantial part of his day 3 engaged in pursuits involving the performance of physical functions that 4 are transferable to a work setting, a specific finding as to this fact 5 may be sufficient to discredit a claimant’s allegations.”
Rosa Maria Pena Martinez v. Nancy A. Berryhill  ·  2019-08-14  ·  C.D. California  ·  pin 169 F.3d at 595
“The ALJ is responsible for resolving conflicts in 11 medical testimony, and resolving ambiguity.”
Roberts v. Acting Comm'r of the Soc. Sec. Admin.  ·  2017-12-29  ·  D. Arizona  ·  pin 169 F.3d at 595
"Where the evidence is susceptible to more than one rational interpretation, it is the ALJ's conclusion that must be upheld."
Bowers-Crawford v. Acting Comm'r of the Soc. Sec. Admin.  ·  2017-11-30  ·  D. Arizona  ·  pin 169 F.3d at 595
"Where the evidence is susceptible to more than one rational interpretation, it is the ALJ's conclusion that must be upheld."