In this case, as noted above, the ALJ failed to provide a detailed summary of the medical records. "When an ALJ believes the treating physician's opinion is unsupported by the objective medical evidence, the ALJ has a burden to 'set[ ] out a detailed and thorough summary of the facts and conflicting clinical evidence, stating his interpretation thereof, and making findings.'" Twilley v. Saul, No. 1:18-CV-0201-JLT, 2019 WL 3760534, at *7 (E.D. Cal. Aug. 9, 2019), citing Cotton v. Bowen, 799 F.2d 1403, 1408 (9th Cir. 1986) (emphasis added); see also Reddick v. Chater, 157 F.3d 715, 725 (9th Cir. 1998) ("The ALJ must do more than offer his conclusions. He must set forth his own interpretations and explain why they, rather than the doctors', are correct.").