Morales

MEMORANDUM ***

Claimant Debra M. Morales (“Morales”), a diabetic suffering from several attendant illnesses, sought disability benefits and supplemental security income. An Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) found Morales “not fully credible” and denied benefits. The district court affirmed.

Morales raises several issues on appeal. First, she argues that the ALJ erred by failing to ask a Vocational Expert to determine whether she had worked as a receptionist. The ALJ determination, however, was supported by substantial evidence and nothing suggests a need for a Vocational Expert.

Second, Morales asserts that the ALJ cited the wrong Dictionary of Occupational Titles provision for the receptionist job. This typographical error was harmless. See Stout v. Comm’r of Social Sec. Admin., 454 F.3d 1050, 1055 (9th Cir.2006).

Next, Morales argues that the ALJ erred in rejecting her subjective symptom and attendant limitations testimony. Morales further contends that this improper rejection of testimony infected and invalidated the ALJ’s residual functional capacity (“RFC”) assessment. We agree.

“While an ALJ is responsible for determining the credibility of a claimant, an ALJ cannot…