Young v. Commissioner of Social Security

Good Law
594 F. App'x 914
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 5, 201412-17132California891 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Randy Young appeals the district court’s judgment affirming the Commissioner of Social Security’s denial of his applications for disability insurance benefits and for supplemental security income under Titles II and XVI of the Social Security Act. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

We review the district court’s order de novo. Molina v. Astrue, 674 F.3d 1104, 1110 (9th Cir.2012). We may set aside the denial of benefits only if it is not supported by substantial evidence or is based on legal error. Id.

Young contends that the Administrative Law Judge’s (ALJ) residual functional capacity (RFC) finding was not supported by substantial evidence and did not properly account for his mental and physical limitations. The ALJ’s determination that Young had the RFC “to perform a full range of work at all exertional levels that involve simple routine tasks that have no frequent dealings with the public and do not require good reading and writing skills,” was consistent with the restrictions identified by the examining clinical neuropr sychologist and with the opinion of the state agency’s psychiatric consultant. Accordingly, the RFC finding adequately…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.