Murphy v. Commissioner Social Security Administration

MEMORANDUM

Constance Murphy (“Murphy” or “claimant”) appeals the district court’s judgment affirming the Commissioner of Social Security’s denial of her application for disability insurance benefits under Title II of the Social Security Act. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we reverse and remand.

This court reviews the district court’s judgment de novo to determine whether the Commissioner’s decision is supported by substantial evidence and whether the Commissioner applied the correct legal standards. Batson v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec. Admin., 359 F.3d 1190, 1193 (9th Cir. 2004). “[I]n dealing with a determination or judgment which an administrative agency alone is authorized to make,” this court “must judge the propriety of such action solely by the grounds invoked by the agency.” SEC v. Chenery Corp., 332 U.S. 194, 196 , 67 S.Ct. 1575 , 91 L.Ed. 1995 (1947).

The Social Security Regulations set out a five-step process for deciding whether a claimant is disabled under the Act. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520 . In “determining whether a combination of impairments establishes equivalence” under Step 3, the administrative law judge (“ALJ”) “must explain adequately his…