T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pa ne l una ni m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l a r g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T LAURAL LE M KE, P la in tif

f - A p p e lla n t, v. COM M I SS I ON ERSOCI AL SE CURI TY AD MI NI S T R AT I ON , D ef

endant- A pp el l ee . N o. 09- 35379 D. C . No . 3 : 0 7 - c v - 0 1 3 6 3 - HU ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt

f orthe D i s tr i c tof

O r e gon M i c ha e l W . M os m a n, D i s tr i c tJ udge , P r e s i di ng

S ubm i tt e d M a y4, 2010 ** P ort l a nd, O r e gon B efo re: K L E IN F E L D , B E A an d IK U T A , C i rcu i tJu d g es.

T he A L J ’ s de t e rm i na t i on tha tL e m ke ’ s ps y c hol ogi c a l i m pa i rm e ntw a s not s e v e r e is s u p p o rte d b ys u b s ta n tia l e v id e n c e . B u rch v. B a rn h a rt , 400 F . 3d 676, 679 

# FI LED MA Y21 2 010 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS2

(9 th C ir. 2 0 0 5 ). T h e A L J p ro p er ly re li ed o n th e o p in io n o f th e s tate ag en cy ’s e va l ua t i ng ps y c hol ogi c a l c ons ul t a nt , D r . A nde r s on, w hi c h w a s c ons i s t e ntw i th the o th e rm e d ic a l e v id e n c e in th e r e c o r d . T on ap et yan v. H al ter , 242 F . 3d 1144, 1149 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 1 ) . M or e ove r , be c aus e L e m ke ’ s f a i l ur e t o s e e k ps y c hi a tr i c tr e a tm e nt w a s “u n e x p la in e d o rin a d e q u a te lye x p la in e d ,” it c o n s titu te dap r o p e rb a s is to d is c r e d it h e ra lle g a tio n o f as e v e r e m e n ta l im p a irm e n t. See Sm ol en v. Cha ter , 80 F . 3d 12 73 , 12 84 (9th C i r. 19 96 ). B ec ause the evi dence of L em ke’ s m ent al i m pa i rm e ntw a s nota m bi guous ori na de qua t e , the A L Jha d no dutyt o de ve l op the r e c o r df u rth e r . M

a yes v. M a ssa n a ri , 2 7 6 F .3 d4 5 3 , 4 5 9

– 6 0 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 1 ) . T he A L J’ s f

ai l ure t o d ocum entspec i fi c f i nd i ng s i n h i s dec i si on w i th res pect to th e “B c r ite r ia ” w a s n o t e rr o n e o u s in th e s e c ir c u m s ta n c e s . P e rth e ap p lic ab le po st -200 0 S oci al S ec uri ty r egul at i on s, 20 C . F . R . §§ 40 4. 15 20 a( e) , 41 6. 92 0a(e ) (200 5), A L Js ar e no l on ger r equi re d t o att ac h a spec i fi c psy chi atri c r evi ew t ech n i q u e fo rm w h en ev al u at i n g th e sev eri ty o f a cl ai m an t ’ s m en t al i m p ai rm en t s; w hi l e the pr e s e ntr e gul a t i ons r e qui r e a dj udi c a t or s t o doc um e ntthe i rf i ndi ngs us i ng th e sp eci al t ech n i q u e, th ey g i v e A L Js g reat er d i scret i o n i n d eci d i n g h o w t o p u b l i sh th o s e f in d in g s . C

f . G ut i errez v . Apf

el , 19 9 F . 3d 10 48 , 10 51 (9th C i r. 20 00 ), s upe rs e de d byr egulat i on , 2 0 C .F .R . § 4 0 4 .1 5 2 0 a( 2 0 0 1 ) . I n th is c a s e , it is l e gi t i m a t e t o i nf

e rtha tthe A L Ji nc orpor a t e d D r . A nde r s on’ s doc um e nt a t i on of the3

“ B cr i t er i a” fi nd i ng s by c re di t i ng D r. A nd er son’ s opi ni on and st at i ng thati tw as

“ es se nt i al l y uncon trovert ed, ” and hence notre bu tt ed by any other m edi ca l e v id e n c e in th e r e c o r d . See M ag al lan es v. B ow en , 88 1 F . 2d 74 7, 75 5 (9th C i r. 1 9 8 9 ) . T h e A L Jr e v ie w e d a n d d is c u s s e dL e m k e ’s m e n ta l h is to ry , a n dto o kin to a c c o u n t L e m k e ’s m e n ta l im p a irm e n t a t e a c h s te p o f th e d is ab ilitya n a ly s is . C on traryt o L em ke’ s a ss ert i on , a vocat i on al experti s notre qu i re d i n every c a s e w h e r e ac la im a n t e x h ib its n o n - e x e rtio n a l lim ita tio n s . Se e H oopaiv . A s tr ue , 4 9 9 F .3 d1 0 7 1 , 1 0 7 6 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 7 ) . I n th is c a s e , b e c au s e th e g r id s a d e q u a te ly re fl ec t ed L em ke’ s r es i du al funct i on al capaci ty, t es t i m on y of avo ca t i on al expert w a s u n n e c e s s a ry . Se e i d. W e co n cl u d e th atth e A L J’ s referen ce t o “ R u l e 2 0 1 . X X ” w as a h arm l ess typ o g r ap h ic a l e rr o r . T h e A L Jd e te rm in e dth a t L e m k e w a s 4 2 y e a r s o ld , lim ite dto s e de nt a ryw ork, abl e t o c om m uni c a t e i n E ngl i s h, a nd ha d al i m i t e d e duc a t i on; g iv e n th is d e s c r ip tio n , it is c le a rth a t th e A L Jin te n d e dto r e f e r e n c e R u le 2 0 1 .2 4 . See 2 0 C .F .R . P t. 4 0 4 , S u b p t. P , A p p . 2 , T ab le N o . 1 , R u le 2 0 1 .2 4 . A l tho ug h the re cord do es no tshow thatL em ke i ncon si st ent l y r eport ed her ille g a l d ru g u s e , th e A L J ’s s e v e n o th e rr e a s o n s f o rm a k in g a n a d v e r s e c r e d ib ility det erm i nat i on w er e both cl ear and conv i nci ng and sup po rt ed by subst ant i al e v id e n c e . See L es terv. Cha ter , 81 F . 3d 821, 834 ( 9th C i r . 1995) .4

Be c au s e th e A LJr e

j e c t e d St o n e ’ s l a yt e s t i mo n ya tl e a s ti n p a rtf o rth e s a me r e a s o n s h e d is c o u n te d L e m k e ’s a lle g a tio n s , w e lik e w is e u p h o ldth is d e te rm in a tio n . V ale nt i ne v . C om m ’ rSoc . Se c . A dm i n. , 5 7 4 F .3 d6 8 5 , 6 9 4 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 9 ) . M o r e o v e r , th e A L J ’s r e a s o n s f o rr e je c tin g S to n e ’s te s tim o n yw e r e p a rtic u la rto S to n e . I d. L e m ke pr ovi de s no l e ga l ba s i s f orhe rc l a i m tha tthe A L Je rr e d bynot se eki ng her tre at i ng ph ys i ci ans’ op i ni on s r egar di ng w hether s he had a l i st ed im p a irm e n t. W h ile th e A L Jm a yc o n ta c t m e d ic a l s o u r c e s to c lar if ya m b ig u itie s in doc um e nt a t i on, S S R 96- 5p, a t*2, i ti s the A L J , a nd notac l a i m ant ’ s tr e a t i ng p h y s ic ia n , w h o is u ltim a te lyr e s p o n s ib le f o rd e te rm in in g w h e th e rac la im a n t is e n title dto d is ab ilityb e n e f its , se e i d. L em k e’s r em ain in g ar g u m en ts fa ilfo r lac ko f f ac tu al su p p o rt. L em k e’s cl ai m s thatthe A L J negl ec t ed t o con si der heri m pai rm ent s i n com bi nat i on , and that th e A L Jin a d e q u a te lye v a lu a te d w h e th e rh e rim p a irm e n ts c o m b in e dto e q u a l a l i st i ng , ar e notre fl ec t ed i n the A L J’ s dec i si on , w hi ch show s thatthe A L J’ s r evi ew w a s pr ope ri n both r e s pe c t s . T he r e i s a l s o no f a c tua l s upportf

orL e m ke ’ s a s s e rt i on thatthe l i m i t at i on s purpo rt edl y pre sc ri bed i n D r. W u’ s not e ( w hi ch i s notcont ai ned in th e r e c o r d ) a r e in c o n s is te n t w ith th e A L J ’s R F C a s s e s s m e n t. AF F I RME D.