Nicasio RODRIGUEZ PAGAN, Plaintiff, Appellant, v. 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.

• affirming the Secre tary’s denial of benefits despite two treating physicians who found claimant disabled where substantial medical evidence supported a third physician’s contrary report
• affirming ALJ's decision to discredit opinions from two treating physicians where they “relied excessively on claimant's subjective complaints, rather than objective medical findings”
• explaining courts “must affirm the [ALJ’s] resolution, even if the record arguably could justify a different conclusion, so long as it is supported by substantial evidence”
• courts “must affirm the [Commissioner’s] resolution, even if the record arguably could justify a different conclusion, so long as it is supported by substantial evidence.”
• “We must affirm the [agency’s] resolution, even if the record arguably could justify a different conclusion, so long as it is supported by substantial evidence.”
• the court must affirm the ALJ’s findings even if the record could arguably justify a different conclusion if the findings are supported by substantial evidence

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).