Skip to content
Do It For The Caselaw
  • Decisions
  • Broadcast
  • Topics
  • About
  • Shop
  • Subscribe
Do It For The Caselaw
  • Decisions
  • Broadcast
  • Topics
  • About
  • Shop
  • Subscribe
Home / Decisions / United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit / Alvarez v. Bisignano
9th Cir.

Alvarez v. Bisignano

July 20, 2026 ·2:23-cv-02508-SSC ·Unanimous · By Raj Patel

The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed the denial of Social Security benefits to a pro se plaintiff who challenged an administrative law judge's decision.

Listen to this decision 0:00 / 1:09
Download

Key takeaways

  • Holding: Affirmed the district court's order affirming the administrative law judge's denial of Social Security benefits.
  • Standard: De novo review for legal error or substantial evidence support.
  • Vote: The panel unanimously concluded the case was suitable for decision without oral argument and affirmed the lower court's decision.
  • Practical effect: The decision reinforces the standard of review for Social Security benefit denials and the requirement for clear and convincing evidence to discount subjective symptoms.

Background

Mari Alvarez appealed the district court’s order affirming an administrative law judge’s denial of Social Security benefits. She challenged the discounting of medical opinions, her subjective symptom testimony, and the vocational expert’s job recommendations.

The court’s reasoning

The court affirmed the denial. It held that the plaintiff forfeited the challenge to medical opinions by not raising it in district court. It found the administrative law judge provided clear and convincing reasons to discount subjective testimony, citing reduced symptoms from treatment, situational stressors, and daily activities. It found no conflict between the plaintiff’s residual functional capacity and the jobs identified by the vocational expert.

What it means going forward

The decision reinforces the standard of review for Social Security benefit denials and the requirement for clear and convincing evidence to discount subjective symptoms.

Civil Social Security

On this page

Background The court’s reasoning What it means going forward

Share

Related from this court

Jul 20, 2026 Alicia Michelle Reyes Chavez v. Todd Blanche Jul 20, 2026 Eiland v. CoreCivic, Inc., et al. Jul 20, 2026 Zajradhara v. Office of the Chief Administrative Hearing Officer, Et Al. Jul 20, 2026 PANABAKER, ET AL. V. CITY OF HOOD RIVER
Do It For The Caselaw

Just Do It For the Caselaw!

Site

  • Mission
  • The Anchors
  • Editorial Process
  • Privacy
  • Terms
  • Contact

Read & Listen

  • Decisions
  • Broadcast
  • Topics
  • The Weekly Brief

Follow

© 2026 Do It For The Caselaw. Not legal advice.