Kristina Miller v. NANCY A. BERRYHILL, Commissioner of Social Security Administration

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
KRISTINA MILLER,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
NANCY A. BERRYHILL, Commissioner
of Social Security Administration,
Defendant-Appellee.
No. 17-16126
D.C. No. 2:15-cv-01419-DJH
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
Diane J. Humetewa, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted June 5, 2019 **
Before: FARRIS, TROTT, and SILVERMAN, Circuit Judges
Kristina Miller appeals the district court order affirming the Social Security
Administration’s denial of disability benefits. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 1291. We review the district court order de novo and the agency decision
FILED
JUN 07 2019
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

-- 1 of 4 --

for substantial evidence and legal error. Garrison v. Colvin, 759 F.3d 995, 1009
(9th Cir. 2014). We affirm.
The ALJ gave clear and convincing reasons supported by substantial
evidence for finding that Miller’s testimony was not entirely credible. Id. at 1014-
15 (setting forth the clear and convincing standard). Miller’s testimony about her
symptoms and daily activities was inconsistent with medical testing, treatment
notes, and other statements she made in the record. The ALJ could reject the
testimony for these reasons. Molina v. Astrue, 674 F.3d 1104, 1112-13 (9th Cir.
2012). The ALJ’s adverse credibility findings were sufficiently specific to satisfy
Brown-Hunter v. Colvin, 806 F.3d 487 (9th Cir. 2015). The ALJ identified the
relevant testimony, gave specific reasons for rejecting the testimony, and cited to
the relevant record. Id. at 493-94.1
The ALJ also gave a germane reason for giving less weight to the opinion of
Miller’s husband. The statement was inconsistent with the medical record. Greger
1We reject the ALJ’s observation that because marijuana is illegal under
federal law, Miller’s use of it “does not enhance her credibility” notwithstanding
that her use was legal under state law. The discrepancy between the federal and
state marijuana laws does not bear on her credibility one way or the other.
However, this error was harmless in light of the totality of the ALJ’s order.
Carmickle v. Comm’r Soc. Sec. Admin., 533 F.3d 1155, 1162 (9th Cir. 2008).
2

-- 2 of 4 --

v. Barnhart, 464 F.3d 968, 972 (9th Cir. 2006); Bayliss v. Barnhart, 427 F.3d
1211, 1218 (9th Cir. 2005).
The ALJ gave specific and legitimate reasons supported by substantial
evidence for finding that Dr. Young’s mental assessment was more consistent with
the record as a whole than Dr. Mitchell’s opinion. Garrison, 759 F.3d at 1012
(setting forth the standard). Dr. Mitchell’s opinion was inconsistent with treatment
notes and Miller’s daily living activities and heavily relied on Miller’s subjective
complaints, which the ALJ found not credible. The ALJ could give less weight to
the opinion for these reasons. Buck v. Berryhill, 869 F.3d 1040, 1050 (9th Cir.
2017); Ghanim v. Colvin, 763 F.3d 1154, 1161-62 (9th Cir. 2014). Dr. Young’s
assessment, which was supported by independent examination notes and objective
test results and consistent with other evidence in the record, provided substantial
evidence to support the ALJ’s mental assessment. Tonapetyan v. Halter, 242 F.3d
1144, 1149 (9th Cir. 2001).
The ALJ also gave specific and legitimate reasons supported by substantial
evidence for giving little weight to the opinions of Dr. Silverman, Dr. Johnson, and
Dr. Moschonas. The opinions were inconsistent with treatment notes and objective
testing and less consistent with the record as a whole than the opinions of Dr.
Wright and Dr. Bargan. The opinions of Dr. Silverman and Dr. Johnson also
3

-- 3 of 4 --

heavily relied on Miller’s subjective complaints, which the ALJ found not credible.
The ALJ could give less weight to the opinions for these reasons. Ghanim, 763
F.3d at 1162; Tommasetti v. Astrue, 533 F.3d 1035, 1041 (9th Cir. 2008).
AFFIRMED.
4

-- 4 of 4 --