Ritzma

MEMORANDUM ***

Glenn C. Ritzma appeals pro se the district court’s decision affirming the Commissioner’s denial of Ritzma’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.

I.

Ritzma contends we should consider two medical reports showing symptomatic evidence of his idiopathic urticaria prior to the relevant period. Although we do not ordinarily consider such new evidence, see Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261, 263 , 96 S.Ct. 549 , 46 L.Ed.2d 483 (1976), we may remand to the ALJ if the evidence is material and there is good cause for failing to include it in the record. See 42 U.S.C. § 405 (g). Here, Ritzma’s evidence may be material, but he does not establish good cause because he does not explain why he failed to submit the evidence to the ALJ. See Mayes v. Massanari, 276 F.3d 453, 463 (9th Cir.2001) (denying a claimant’s request to submit new evidence when the claimant failed to explain why the new evidence could not have been submitted to the ALJ).

II.

Ritzma argues the ALJ should have developed the record with respect to…