Litzinger-Patera

MEMORANDUM **

Judy A. Litzinger-Patera (“Patera”) challenges a denial of disability benefits by the Commissioner of Social Security Administration (“Commissioner”). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . Because we conclude that substantial evidence supports the decision of the Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”), we affirm the district court.

We review de novo the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of the Commissioner. Batson v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec. Admin., 359 F.3d 1190, 1193 (9th Cir.2004). The Commissioner’s decision to deny benefits is reviewed for substantial evidence. Id. We affirm under the substantial evidence standard if inferences reasonably drawn from the record support the Commissioner’s findings. Id. When, as here, the Appeals Council denies review, we review the ALJ’s opinion as the Commissioner’s final decision. Id. at 1193 n. 1 (citing 20 C.F.R. § 404.981 ).

I.

Patera first asserts that her multiple physical and mental impairments are cumulatively equivalent to three listed impairments and that the ALJ erroneously failed to consider the combined effect of her impairments in determining otherwise. 1 She argues that her combined…