# Stacey Brown v. Michael Astrue

> Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · December 15, 2009 · 356 F. App'x 997

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3030509

## Case

- **Full name:** Stacey M. BROWN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Michael J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant—Appellee
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
- **Decided:** December 15, 2009
- **Citations:** 356 F. App'x 997
- **Precedential status:** Unpublished
- **Opinion:** Opinion
- **Judges:** O'Scannlain, Rawlinson, Bea
- **Nature of suit:** Civil
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3030509

## Opinion text

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT DEC 15 2009

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

STACEY M. BROWN, No. 08-17357

Plaintiff - Appellant, D.C. No. 2:07-cv-00638-CMK

v.
MEMORANDUM *
MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of
Social Security,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of California
Craig Kellison, Magistrate Judge, Presiding

Submitted December 11, 2009**
San Francisco, California

Before: O’SCANNLAIN, RAWLINSON and BEA, Circuit Judges.

Appellant Stacey Brown appeals the district court’s entry of summary

judgment in favor of the Commissioner.

*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without
oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
Substantial evidence supports the ALJ’s adverse credibility finding because

he properly relied upon medical records of Brown’s examining physician, Dr.

Chee, that contradicted Brown’s testimony regarding the severity of her symptoms.

See Carmickle v. Comm’r, Soc. Sec. Admin., 533 F.3d 1155, 1161 (9th Cir. 2008)

(concluding that the ALJ’s adverse credibility determination was proper when it

relied on the examining physician’s contradictory opinion). Because this is a valid

basis supporting the ALJ’s decision, any error the ALJ made in improperly

considering other evidence was harmless. See Bray v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec. Admin.,

554 F.3d 1219, 1227 (9th Cir. 2009).

The ALJ’s assessment of Brown’s RFC was proper because once an adverse

credibility determination is made, an ALJ is not required to credit that testimony in

assessing a claimant’s RFC. See Bayliss v. Barnhart, 427 F.3d 1211, 1215, 1217

(9th Cir. 2005).

AFFIRMED.

2

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3030509. Public record. Not legal advice.