Burton

MEMORANDUM ***

Randell Burton appeals the district court’s order affirming the Commissioner of Social Security’s decision to deny his claim for disability insurance benefits under Title II of the Social Security Act. We have jurisdiction to hear this appeal under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review an order denying benefits de novo, applying the same standard as the district court. Massachi v. Astrue, 486 F.3d 1149, 1152 (9th Cir.2007). The Commissioner’s decision may only be set aside if it is not supported by substantial evidence or if it is based on legal error. Id. Burton makes four arguments for reversal. We conclude that the denial of benefits is supported by the evidence and is not the product of legal error. Therefore, we affirm.

First, Burton argues that the Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) erred at step three of the sequential evaluation process by failing to classify his impairments as meeting the requirements of § 3.03(B) in the Listing of Impairments. We disagree.

To meet the requirements of Listing 3.03(B), asthma with attacks, a claimant must present evidence ■ of “prolonged symptomatic episodes lasting one or more days and requiring intensive treatment ...…