Opinion
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION. (See Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure Rule 36-3)
Claimant sought review of determination that she was ineligible for supplemental security income (SSI) disability benefits. The United States District Court for the Central District of California, A. Andrew Hauk, J., granted summary judgment in favor of Commissioner of the Social Security Administration. Claimant appealed. The Court of Appeals held that: (1) claimant failed to establish that she had a severe impairment, and (2) ALJ satisfied his duty to develop the record fully by holding record open so claimant could supplement the medical evidence.
Affirmed.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California A. Andrew Hauk, District Judge, Presiding.
Before D.W. NELSON, FERNANDEZ and RYMER, Circuit Judges.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Lida Petrosyan appeals the district court's summary judgment finding her ineligible for supplemental security income disability benefits. We affirm. Substantial evidence supports the Administrative Law Judge's ("ALJ") finding that Petrosyan did not have a severe impairment. The three medical reports that Petrosyan submitted as evidence provide scant basis for a finding of severe impairment, and the ALJ gave numerous, specific reasons for rejecting the claimant's subjective pain testimony. See Flaten v. Secretary of Health & Human Services, 44 F.3d 1453, 1464 (9th Cir.1995); Magallanes v. Bowen, 881 F.2d 747, 751 (9th
Page 644.
Cir.1989). The ALJ satisfied his duty to develop the record fully by holding the record open so that the claimant could supplement the medical evidence. See Tidwell v. Apfel, 161 F.3d 599, 602 (9th Cir.1998).
AFFIRMED.