Charles Buck v. Carolyn W. Colvin
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Charles Buck appeals the district court’s decision affirming the Commissioner’s denial of Social Security benefits. Because the Commissioner’s decision is not supported by substantial evidence, we reverse and remand to the district court with instructions to remand to the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) for payment of benefits.
We review de novo a district court’s decision affirming the Commissioner’s denial of Social Security benefits. Hill v. Astrue, 698 F.3d 1153, 1158 (9th Cir.2012). The Commissioner’s decision may only be overturned if it is based on legal error or is not supported by substantial evidence. Id. at 1158-59 .
Despite considerable and consistent evidence of emotional deficits caused by Buck’s bipolar and personality disorders, the ALJ concluded that Buck could return to a warehouse job that he held for no more than three months in 2005. The ALJ reached this decision without any input from a medical expert and without considering what the warehouse job entailed. Records from Buck’s three therapists; his treating psychiatrist; a consultative psychiatrist; and his primary treating source, Nurse Practitioner Lisa Vickers, show that Buck received…