Cssa

MEMORANDUM

Plaintiff-Appellant Kelly Ann Worden appeals from the district court’s order affirming the administrative denial of her application for supplemental security income (SSI) disability benefits. Worden argues that the administrative law judge (ALJ) improperly rejected a treating physician’s opinion that she suffered from disabling mental impairments and that, contrary to the conclusion of the Appeals Council when it denied farther review, additional evidence that she submitted to the Appeals Council would have changed the outcome. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

We review de novo a district court’s judgment upholding the denial of social security benefits. Berry v. Astrue, 622 F.3d 1228, 1231 (9th Cir.2010). “We will ‘set aside a denial of benefits only if it is not supported by substantial evidence or is based on legal error.’ ” Id. (quoting Bray v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec. Admin., 554 F.3d 1219, 1222 (9th Cir.2009)). Although we do not have jurisdiction to review the Appeals Council’s denial of further review, we may consider additional evidence presented for the first time to the Appeals Council when reviewing the agency’s disability…