Ginny Lambert v. Kilolo Kijakazi ( 2022 )

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAY 16 2022
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
GINNY LYN LAMBERT No. 19-35360
Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 2:17-cv-01235-AA
v.
MEMORANDUM*
KILOLO KIJAKAZI, Acting Commissioner
of Social Security,
Defendant-Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Oregon
Ann L. Aiken, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted May 12, 2022**
Pasadena, California
Before: WATFORD and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges, and AMON,*** District
Judge.
Ginny Lyn Lambert appeals from the district court’s order affirming the
*
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).
***
The Honorable Carol Bagley Amon, United States District Judge for
the Eastern District of New York, sitting by designation.
Page 2 of 4
Commissioner of Social Security’s denial of her applications for disability
insurance benefits and supplemental security insurance benefits under Titles II and
XVI of the Social Security Act. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and
42 U.S.C. § 405(g). We affirm.
1. Substantial evidence supports the administrative law judge’s (ALJ’s)
decision to give “little weight” to the opinion of Lambert’s treating neurologist, Dr.
Rodrigo Lim, that Lambert was “permanently disabled.” Dr. Lim’s opinion was
contradicted by other doctors’ opinions, and the ALJ offered “specific and
legitimate” reasons supported by the record for discounting it. Bayliss v. Barnhart,
427 F.3d 1211, 1216 (9th Cir. 2005). The ALJ set out “a detailed and thorough
summary of the facts and conflicting clinical evidence, stating [her] interpretation
thereof, and making findings.” Magallanes v. Bowen, 881 F.2d 747, 751 (9th Cir.
1989) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted). The ALJ properly evaluated
Dr. Lim’s opinion in relation to other medical evidence, including the opinion of
consulting doctor Richard Alley that Lambert was capable of light work.
The ALJ also described at length how Lambert’s actual functioning
exceeded the limits to be expected on the basis of Dr. Lim’s opinion, and she
identified inconsistencies in Lambert’s testimony that suggested Lambert could
Page 3 of 4
function beyond the limitations reported by Dr. Lim. An ALJ may discount a
treating physician’s opinion where a claimant’s testimony or her activities conflict
with the opinion. Morgan v. Comm’r Soc. Sec. Admin., 169 F.3d 595, 601–02 (9th
Cir. 1999). Any error in the ALJ’s remaining reasons for discounting Dr. Lim’s
opinion was harmless. See Stout v. Comm’r Soc. Sec. Admin., 454 F.3d 1050,
1054–56 (9th Cir. 2006).
2. Contrary to Lambert’s contention, the ALJ did not improperly omit from
her residual functional capacity (RFC) a limitation on her social interaction that
was identified by agency psychologists. The ALJ is “responsible for translating
and incorporating clinical findings into a succinct RFC.” Rounds v. Comm’r Soc.
Sec. Admin., 807 F.3d 996, 1006 (9th Cir. 2015) (citing Stubbs-Danielson v.
Astrue, 539 F.3d 1169, 1174 (9th Cir. 2008)). In limiting Lambert to “superficial
interaction with coworkers and the public,” the RFC reasonably translated a
limitation that the agency psychologists described as permitting “occasional and
brief contact w[ith] the public or co-workers.”
3. Finally, substantial evidence also supports the ALJ’s conclusion that
Lambert could return to her past work as a cashier. Lambert cites Zavalin v.
Colvin, 778 F.3d 842, 846–47 (9th Cir. 2015), in which we held that there is an
Page 4 of 4
apparent conflict between an RFC limited to simple and repetitive tasks and the
demands of the cashier job, which requires Level 3 Reasoning. Unlike the ALJ in
Zavalin, however, the ALJ here addressed the conflict. The ALJ’s conclusion that
Lambert was capable of Level 3 Reasoning is supported by substantial evidence
because, in addition to Lambert’s education and work history, the ALJ relied on
her own finding that no record evidence suggested that Lambert could not function
at that level.
AFFIRMED.