Angell Flores v. Kilolo Kijakazi

I. Introduction

Plaintiff Angell F. (“Plaintiff”) challenges the Commissioner’s denial of her application for Supplemental Security Income (SSI). Plaintiff claims the ALJ gave insufficient reasons for rejecting the opinion of consulting examining neurologist, Dr. Sarah Maze, that Plaintiff could occasionally reach with the left arm and occasionally handle and finger with the left hand. Plaintiff also argues that the ALJ erred in developing the record by asking incomplete hypotheticals questions to the vocational expert (VE). Plaintiff filed her opening brief on May 26, 2023 (“Pl. Br.”); the Commissioner filed its opposition on June 26, 2023 (“Comm’r Br.”). (See Dkt. Nos. 15, 19.) For the reasons set forth below, the Commissioner’s decision is AFFIRMED.

II. Standard of Review

Under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), a district court may review the Commissioner’s decision to deny benefits. A court must affirm an ALJ’s findings of fact if they, when applied against proper legal standards, are supported by substantial evidence. Mayes v. Massanari, 276 F.3d 453, 458-59 (9th Cir. 2001). “Substantial evidence . . . is ‘more than a mere scintilla[,]’ . . . [which] means—and means…