Check how courts have cited this case. Use our free citator for the most current treatment.
No. 10304133
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Webber v. Colvin
No. 10304133 · Decided December 24, 2024
No. 10304133·Ninth Circuit · 2024·
FlawFinder last updated this page Apr. 2, 2026
Case Details
Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided
December 24, 2024
Citation
No. 10304133
Disposition
See opinion text.
Full Opinion
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS DEC 24 2024
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
WILLIAM WEBBER, No. 23-3672
D.C. No.
Plaintiff - Appellant, 4:21-cv-05101-LRS
v.
MEMORANDUM**
CAROLYN W. COLVIN,*
Acting Commissioner of Social Security,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Washington
Lonny R. Suko, District Judge, Presiding
Argued and Submitted December 6, 2024
Seattle, Washington
Before: W. FLETCHER, BERZON, and R. NELSON, Circuit Judges.
Claimant William Webber filed two applications for disability benefits. In
response to the first application, Webber was found non-disabled through May 17,
*
Carolyn W. Colvin is substituted as Acting Commissioner of the
Social Security Administration pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 43(c).
**
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
2017. In response to the second application, Webber was found non-disabled
through December 31, 2017. Webber appealed from the second decision. The
Appeals Council denied a request for review. The district court affirmed the denial
of benefits. We affirm the district court.
We review the district court’s decision in a social security disability benefits
case de novo. Valentine v. Comm’r Soc. Sec. Admin., 574 F.3d 685, 690 (9th Cir.
2009). We “independently determine whether the Commissioner’s decision (1) is
free of legal error and (2) is supported by substantial evidence.” Smolen v. Chater,
80 F.3d 1273, 1279 (9th Cir. 1996).
The ALJ did not err in applying the Chavez presumption. For a claimant to
“overcome the presumption of continuing nondisability arising from the first
administrative law judge’s findings of nondisability,” the claimant “must prove
‘changed circumstances’ indicating a greater disability.” Chavez v. Bowen, 844
F.2d 691, 693 (9th Cir. 1988). If the presumption is rebutted, the ALJ must adopt
specific findings from the previous decision unless there is new and material
evidence relating to such a finding or a change in law. See id. at 693-94; see also
AR 97-4(9). Substantial evidence supports the ALJ’s conclusion that the new
evidence in the record does not support an award of benefits.
The ALJ provided “specific, clear, and convincing reasons” to reject
Webber’s subjective statements, pointing to several inconsistencies in the record
2 23-3672
that contradicted his statements. Lingenfelter v. Astrue, 504 F.3d 1028, 1036 (9th
Cir. 2007) (quoting Smolen, 80 F.3d at 1281).
The ALJ did not err in evaluating Webber’s medical evidence.
The ALJ found Dr. Reuben Grothaus’ diagnosis of ankylosing spondylitis
unpersuasive because “the claimant does not have sufficient objective findings for
this condition.” Substantial evidence supports this determination. Webber’s prior
disability determination contained objective evidence supporting the conclusion
that Webber did not have ankylosing spondylitis, and Webber did not offer
objective medical evidence that would alter that conclusion.
The ALJ found Timothy Salvos’ opinion unpersuasive because it relied on
Dr. Grothaus’ diagnosis of ankylosing spondylitis. Further, Salvos’ opinion was
based on evidence “well after the relevant period.”
The ALJ did not err in not addressing the treatment notes of Si Feng.
Feng’s notes are not a medical opinion. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1513(a)(1)-(3).
Moreover, Feng’s notes nowhere “indicate that [Webber] is incapable of working
except under the recommended conditions.” Valentine, 574 F.3d at 691.
The ALJ’s assessment of Mark Johnson’s examination is both internally
consistent and supported by substantial evidence. Webber received surgery to help
treat his neurogenic claudication symptoms after being examined by Johnson.
The ALJ concluded that this surgery improved, or eliminated, Webber’s allegedly
3 23-3672
severe neurogenic claudication. Webber also reported to his provider that the
surgery improved his symptoms, but he began to suffer more pain after a vehicle
collision.
AFFIRMED.
4 23-3672
Plain English Summary
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS DEC 24 2024 MOLLY C.
Key Points
01NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS DEC 24 2024 MOLLY C.
02COLVIN,* Acting Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant - Appellee.
03Suko, District Judge, Presiding Argued and Submitted December 6, 2024 Seattle, Washington Before: W.
04Claimant William Webber filed two applications for disability benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS DEC 24 2024 MOLLY C.
FlawCheck shows no negative treatment for Webber v. Colvin in the current circuit citation data.
This case was decided on December 24, 2024.
Use the citation No. 10304133 and verify it against the official reporter before filing.