Case Explained: YANDRICH V. BISIGNANO

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Filed: 2026-08-11 Docket: 3:24-cv-05907-MLP The Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court’s order upholding the Commissioner of Social Security’s denial of benefits to Zachary L. Yandrich. The court applied a de novo standard of review to the district court’s decision and reviewed the Administrative Law Judge’s (ALJ) findings for substantial evidence or legal error. The court held that substantial evidence supported the ALJ’s evaluation of medical opinions, specifically finding it permissible to discount the opinions of Dr. Jamito, Dr. Wingate, and Mr. Bolden as inconsistent with the longitudinal record, while reasonably crediting the better-supported opinions of Drs. Sacks, Ahn, and Melamed. Additionally, the court determined the ALJ provided specific, clear, and convincing reasons for discounting Yandrich’s symptom testimony regarding disabling fatigue and social anxiety because these allegations conflicted with normal medical findings and reported activities; these same valid reasons were deemed germane grounds for rejecting similar lay witness testimony from Amanda DeLouise. Finally, the court rejected challenges to the residual functional capacity and step-five analysis, noting that the ALJ was required to include only supported limitations and permissibly relied on Medical-Vocational Rule 201.27 to find Yandrich not disabled. As a result of this affirmation, the denial of Social Security benefits remains in effect. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.