Case Explained: ARMES V. BISIGNANO

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Filed: 2026-08-14 Docket: 1:23-cv-00905-SCR The Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court’s order upholding the Commissioner of Social Security’s denial of disability insurance benefits. The court applied a de novo standard of review to the district court’s decision, determining that it would only reverse if the Administrative Law Judge’s (ALJ) findings were not supported by substantial evidence or based on legal error. The court held that the ALJ provided clear and convincing reasons to reject Armes’ subjective symptom testimony regarding her heart problems, knee pain, and hand limitations. The ALJ identified inconsistencies between Armes’ claimed disabling limitations and the objective medical record, noting that her cardiac condition had improved following procedures, her knee pain was stable with medication, and she lacked treatment for her alleged hand pain despite claiming it was severe. Furthermore, the court found substantial evidence supported the ALJ’s rejection of the treating physician’s opinion as an outlier because it was brief, conclusory, and inconsistent with the broader medical record showing normal examination findings. Regarding the Residual Functional Capacity (RFC) determination, the court concluded that substantial evidence supported the ALJ’s finding that Armes could perform light work with specific postural and environmental limitations. The ALJ considered all medically determinable impairments, including non-severe ones, and relied on three consistent medical opinions. Finally, the court determined that the ALJ properly found Armes capable of performing her past relevant work, as she did not challenge the persuasiveness of the medical opinions supporting this conclusion. Consequently, the denial of benefits is affirmed. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.