Mejias

MEMORANDUM ***

Antonio Mejias appeals the district court’s summary judgment affirming the Commissioner of Social Security (“Commissioner”) in his denial of Mejias’ application for social security disability insurance benefits under Title II of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 401-33 . We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo the district court’s order upholding the Commissioner’s denial. Tidwell v. Apfel, 161 F.3d 599, 601 (9th Cir.1998). We must uphold the Commissioner’s decision if it is supported by substantial evidence and if it is free from legal error. Id. We affirm.

Because Mejias could engage in other types of substantial gainful work that exists in the national economy, substantial evidence supports the ALJ’s finding that Mejias was not disabled under the Social Security Act. See Macri v. Chater, 93 F.3d 540, 544 (9th Cir.1996).

Mejias’ contention that the Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) improperly disregarded some testimony and did not attach enough weight to other testimony is without merit. Because all of the examining doctors provided conclusions similar to the ALJ’s finding that Mejias could perform light work, and because Dr. De…