Pallas

MEMORANDUM **

Michael Pallas appeals the district court’s judgment affirming the decision of the Commissioner of Social Security denying his application for disability insurance benefits. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . Reviewing de novo, Burch v. Barnhart, 400 F.3d 676, 679 (9th Cir.2005), we affirm the decision of the district court. Because the parties are familiar with the factual and procedural history of the case, we do not recount it here.

1. Whether Pallas suffered from a severe mental impairment

We reject Pallas’s argument that the Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) erred in concluding that Pallas did not suffer from a severe mental impairment. In order to establish that he had a medically severe impairment, Pallas bore the burden of proving that he suffered from “any impairment or combination of impairments which significantly limit[ed his] physical or mental ability to do basic work activities.” Bowen v. Yuckert, 482 U.S. 137, 141 , 107 S.Ct. 2287 , 96 L.Ed.2d 119 (1987) (quoting 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520 (c), 416.920(c)). The medical report of Dr. Burkhart, which is the only psychological evaluation of Pallas prior to the expiration of his insured…