Stacey M. Brown v. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social Security

* 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).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
STACEY M. BROWN,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of
Social Security,
Defendant - Appellee.
No. 08-17357
D.C. No. 2:07-cv-00638-CMK
MEMORANDUM *
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.
FILED
DEC 15 2009
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

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 of 2 --