Sprau

MEMORANDUM *

Ammon Sprau appeals pro se the district court’s decision affirming the Commissioner’s denial of Sprau’s application for disability insurance benefits under Title II of the Social Security Act. We review de novo, Flaten v. Sec’y of Health and Human Servs., 44 F.3d 1453, 1457 (9th Cir. 1995), and we affirm.

DISCUSSION

Sprau raises several issues, but not all were presented to the district court. As a general rule, we will not decide an issue raised for the first time on appeal. Bolker v. Comm’r of Internal Revenue, 760 F.2d 1039, 1042 (9th Cir.1985). Nonetheless, we may do so when the issue presented is purely one of law and the opposing party would suffer no prejudice. Taniguchi v. Schultz, 303 F.3d 950, 959 (9th Cir.2002). We do so here because the Commissioner has availed himself of the opportunity to respond to each of Sprau’s arguments and has responded adequately based on evidence already present in the record.

Sprau submits he is disabled due to heart disease, back problems, knee problems, high blood pressure and borderline diabetes. He contends the ALJ erred by finding these impairments were not severe enough to meet or equal, either singly or in…