Reed
Reed v. Astrue
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Plaintiff-Appellant Patricia Reed (“Mrs. Reed”) appeals from the district court’s *612 judgment affirming Defendant-Appellee Commissioner’s adoption of the Administrative Law Judge’s (“ALJ”) decision finding her husband Lonnie Reed (“Mr.Reed”) not disabled under Titles II and XVI of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 401-34 , 1381-83f, during the period from July 31,1991 through December 31,1994. Mrs. Reed argues, among other things, that the ALJ made several errors in determining that Mr. Reed’s residual functional capacity (“RFC”) permitted him to perform a full range of light work. 1 We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and affirm.
We review de novo a district court’s order affirming an ALJ’s denial of benefits, and “may set aside a denial of benefits only if it is not supported by substantial evidence or is based on legal error.” Bray v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec. Admin., 554 F.3d 1219, 1222 (9th Cir.2009) (internal quotation signals and citation omitted). “Where the evidence as a whole can support either a grant or a denial, we may not substitute our judgment for the ALJ’s.” Id. (internal quotation signals and citation omitted).