Kathleen Chapman v. Carolyn Colvin

MEMORANDUM

Kathleen A. Chapman appeals from the distinct court’s judgment affirming the Commissioner of Social Security’s denial of Chapman’s application for disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income under Titles II and XVI of the Social Security Act. At step five of the sequential evaluation process, the administrative law judge (“ALJ”) determined that Chapman could perform jobs that exist in significant numbers in the national economy. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo,, Molina v. Astrue, 674 F.3d 1104, 1110 (9th Cir. 2012), and we affirm.

In her written decision, the ALJ failed to mention a two-page ‘Work Activity Questionnaire” completed by Chapman’s former supervisor. This omission was error because the questionnaire includes information concerning Chapman’s ability to work, and the ALJ was obliged to comment on it. Tobeler v. Colvin, 749 F.3d 830, 833-34 (9th Cir. 2014); Stout v. Comm’r, Soc. Sec. Admin., 454 F.3d 1050, 1053 (9th Cir. 2006). The error, however, was harmless.

Chapman does not challenge any other aspect of the ALJ’s decision, including the determination that Chapman’s symptom testimony was not fully…