The following excerpt is from Keegan v. Shalala, 5 F.3d 537 (9th Cir. 1993):
Id. at 345. 5 These findings "must be sufficiently specific to allow a reviewing court to conclude that the adjudicator rejected the claimant's testimony on permissible grounds and did not 'arbitrarily discredit a claimant's testimony regarding pain.' " Id. at 345-56 (quoting Elam v. Railroad Retirement Bd., 921 F.2d 1210, 1215 (11th Cir.1991)).
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.