Jane Behling v. Carolyn W. Colvin

MEMORANDUM

Appellant Jane Marie Behling (“Behling”) appeals the district court’s decision remanding the case for further proceedings. Behling contends that the district court erred when it declined to remand the case for an award of disability benefits based on there being no outstanding issues to be resolved upon a review of the record under the “credit-as-true” rule, which was reaffirmed in Garrison v. Colvin, 759 F.3d 995 (9th Cir.2014). Reviewing the district court’s decision for abuse of discretion, Harman v. Apfel, 211 F.3d 1172, 1173 (9th Cir.2000), we reverse and remand to the district court with instructions to remand to the ALJ for an award of benefits.

As articulated in Garrison , the credit-as-true rule can be applied when three conditions are met:

Id. at 1020 . However, there is flexibility to remand for further proceedings “when the record as a whole creates serious doubt as to whether the claimant is, in fact, disabled within the meaning of the Social Security Act.” Id. at 1021 .

Here, all three requirements of the ered-it-as-true rule are satisfied. First, there is no need to develop the record or convene further proceedings. Although the ALJ did not do a…