United States District Court, D. Arizona
FREDERICK J. MARTONE, District Judge.
This is an action for judicial review of a denial of disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income under the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 405(g) and 1383(c). The court has before it plaintiff's opening brief (doc. 13), defendant's response (doc. 20), and plaintiff's reply (doc. 21).
The plaintiff argues that the administrative law judge (ALJ) failed to properly weigh medical source opinion evidence, improperly discounted plaintiff's subjective complaints, and erred in applying the Medical-Vocational Guidelines.
We have reviewed the record and conclude that substantial evidence supports the ALJ's findings that plaintiff retains the residual functional capacity to perform a limited range of sedentary work. We also conclude that the ALJ gave sufficiently specific and legitimate reasons for discounting the opinions of plaintiff's treating physicians and discounting the severity of plaintiff's subjective complaints, based on contradicting medical opinions, objective medical evidence, and plaintiff's daily activities. Finally, the ALJ did not err in using the Medical Vocational Guidelines as a framework for considering the effect of plaintiff's nonexertional limitations. The ALJ's determination that plaintiff's nonexertional limitations would have little or no effect on the occupational base of unskilled sedentary work is substantially supported by the record.
IT IS ORDERED AFFIRMING the decision of the Commissioner ...