Donald E. EMBREY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Otis R. BOWEN, Secretary of Health and Human Services, Defendant-Appellee

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• recognizing that conclusory reasons 2 1 do not “achieve the level of specificity” required to justify an ALJ’s rejection of an 2 opinion
• holding that ALJ’s conclusion that 11 doctor’s opinions were contrary to objective findings, including 12 “relative lack of positive findings,” was not sufficiently 13 specific
• concluding that even where 23 the ALJ’s “opinion does review the medical evidence,” merely stating that a treating physician’s 24 opinions are not supported by objective findings is insufficient
• holding that an ALJ may not rely on vocational 23 testimony if the characteristics of the individual in the hypothetical questions propounded to the expert do not match the characteristics of the claimant
• holding that 10 conclusory reasons are insufficient to reject a treating doctor’s opinions
• noting that it is not enough for the ALJ to simply recount the medical evidence in seriatim fashion and then reach unexplained conclusions

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).