Barbara Boyd v. Michael Astrue

Good Law
524 F. App'x 334
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 30, 201311-36035California823 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Appellant Barbara Boyd’s application for Social Security disability benefits was denied by an Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”). The Appeals Council denied Boyd’s request for review, and it noted that Boyd’s new evidence did not alter the validity of the ALJ’s ruling. The district court affirmed, and Boyd appealed to this Court. She argues that: (1) the Appeals Council gave inadequate reasons for denying review; (2) the ALJ’s ruling was not supported by substantial evidence in the updated record; (3) the ALJ did not sufficiently account for Boyd’s advanced age; and (4) the ALJ’s adverse credibility finding was erroneous. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253 , and we affirm.

1. The Appeals Council gave adequate reasons for denying review of the ALJ’s ruling. As an initial matter, we do not have jurisdiction to review the Appeals Council’s non-final agency action. Taylor v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec. Admin., 659 F.3d 1228, 1231 (9th Cir.2011). Moreover, “in rejecting [new] evidence, the Appeals Council is not required to make any particular evidentiary finding.” Gomez v. Chater, 74 F.3d 967 , 972 (9th Cir.1996), superseded by regulation on other grounds as stated in…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.