while only one visit allowed a portion of [the examining physician’s] assessment to be given great weight”). As such, this is not a specific and legitimate reason for rejecting Dr. Bohan’s opinion. Because the ALJ failed to provide specific and legitimate reasons, supported by substantial evidence, for rejecting Dr. Bo-han’s opinion, remand is warranted. B. Remand for Award of Benefits Is Warranted Pl'aihtiff argues that Dr. Bohan’s opinion should be credited as true and this case should be remanded for award of benefits. JS at 50. The Court agrees. 1. Applicable Law The choice whether to reverse and remand for further administrative' proceedings, or to. reverse and simply award benefits, is within the discretion of: the court. Harman v. Apfel, 211 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2000) (<HOLDING>)„.The Ninth Circuit has observed that “the
holding that decision to sentence juvenile as an adult subject to abuse of discretion review holding that the distinct courts decision whether to remand for further proceedings or payment of benefits is discretionary and is subject to review for abuse of discretion holding that the appropriate standard of review is abuse of discretion holding a trial courts decision involving withdrawal or discharge of counsel is subject to review for abuse of discretion recognizing that the decision of whether to give a jury instruction is reviewed for abuse of discretion