Case Name: Shirley K. KLAHN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Carolyn W. COLVIN, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2014-05-02
Citations: 572 F. App'x 474
Docket Number: No. 12-16140
Parties: Shirley K. KLAHN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Carolyn W. COLVIN, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant-Appellee.
Judges: Before: KLEINFELD, NGUYEN, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 572
Pages: 474–475

Head Matter:
Shirley K. KLAHN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Carolyn W. COLVIN, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant-Appellee.
No. 12-16140.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Argued and Submitted April 11, 2014.
Filed May 2, 2014.
Manuel D. Serpa, Esquire, Supervisory, Orange, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellant.
Michael A. Johns, USPX — Office of the U.S. Attorney, Phoenix, AZ, Alexess Rea, Social Security Administration Office of the General Counsel, Region VIII, Denver, CO, for Defendant-Appellee.
Before: KLEINFELD, NGUYEN, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
We need not resolve at this time Appellant Shirley Klahn's arguments challenging the administrative law judge's (ALJ) rulings finding her not fully credible and rejecting her doctors' opinions about the extent of her disability. Even if Klahn's arguments on those issues fail, it appears she may nonetheless be entitled to benefits under our holding in Lounsburry v. Barnhart, 468 F.3d 1111 (9th Cir.2006). The ALJ has not yet addressed Lounsburry's impact on this case, so we remand to the ALJ for further consideration of Klahn's claim in light of Lounsburry.
The Commissioner contends that Klahn waived any argument based on Lounsbur-ry by not raising it until she submitted a Rule 28(j) letter shortly before oral argument. We may consider an argument not presented in the opening brief if "the failure to raise the issue properly did not prejudice the defense of the opposing party." United States v. Ullah, 976 F.2d 509, 514 (9th Cir.1992). The Commissioner points to no prejudice caused by Louns-burry 's late appearance, which is not surprising. The Commissioner was aware of Lounsburry, having cited the case in her own brief. If the Commissioner believes there are grounds for denying Klahn benefits even under the rule established in Lounsburry, she will have a full opportunity to raise those arguments before the ALJ on remand.
The parties shall bear their own costs on appeal.
VACATED AND REMANDED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.