Smith v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration

Good Law
611 F. App'x 897
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 14, 201513-35441California750 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Janet Smith appeals from a district court order affirming the Commissioner’s denial of her application for Social Security Disability Insurance benefits. She argues that the Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) erred by rejecting the opinion of her primary care physician, finding her not credible, rejecting her husband’s testimony, and failing to include all of her limitations in a hypothetical question posed to the vocational expert. Alternatively,, she seeks remand for the ALJ to consider new evidence. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and affirm.

1. A reviewing court “may at any time order additional evidence to be táken before the Commissioner of Social Security, but only upon a showing that there is new evidence which is material and that there is good cause for the failure to incorporate such evidence into the record in a prior proceeding.” 42 U.S.C. § 405 (g). Such good cause exists if “new information surfaces after the Secretary’s final decision and the claimant could not have obtained that evidence at the time of the administrative proceeding.” Key v. Heckler, 754 F.2d 1545, 1551 (9th Cir.1985). Smith seeks a remand for the agency to consider a…

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.