Abbott

MEMORANDUM *

Cathryn Abbott appeals from the district court’s affirmance of the final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security denying her application for disability insurance benefits and Supplemental Security Income. 1 She contends that the Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) inexplicably ignored vocational evidence from the Oregon Vocational Rehabilitation Division that, if credited, would entitle her to benefits.

The Oregon Vocational Rehabilitation Division report was prepared by a vocational counselor and is therefore lay evidence. Because lay evidence “as to a claimant’s symptoms is competent evidence that an ALJ must take into account,” an ALJ commits legal error “unless he or she expressly determines to disregard such testimony and gives reasons germane to each witness for doing so.” Lewis v. Apfel, 236 F.3d 503, 511 (9th Cir.2001); 20 C.F.R. § 404.1513 (d)(3) (requiring the ALJ to consider lay evidence, including evidence provided by “public and private social welfare agency personnel,” in making disability decisions). The Commissioner concedes on appeal that “the ALJ did not specify his reasons for rejecting the vocational counselor’s report.” Brief for Appellee…