Christopher Jones v. Andrew Saul ( 2019 )


Menu:
  •                                                                              FILED
    NOT FOR PUBLICATION
    NOV 13 2019
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                       MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
    CHRISTOPHER JONES,                               No.    18-35657
    Plaintiff-Appellant,               D.C. No. 2:17-cv-00215-CWD
    v.
    MEMORANDUM*
    ANDREW M. SAUL, Commissioner of
    Social Security,
    Defendant-Appellee.
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the District of Idaho
    Candy Dale, Magistrate Judge, Presiding
    Argued and Submitted October 25, 2019
    Portland, Oregon
    Before: FARRIS, BEA, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges.
    The record supports the Commissioner of Social Security’s denial of
    Christopher Jones’s application for disability insurance benefits under Title II of
    the Social Security Act. Jones does not suffer from a severe impairment under the
    *
    This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
    except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
    Act because he had no medically determinable impairments before his insured
    status for disability benefits expired.
    Disability consideration is limited to impairments “demonstrable by
    medically acceptable clinical and laboratory diagnostic techniques,” 42 U.S.C. §
    423(d)(3), and the claimant bears the burden of showing that he had a medically
    determinable impairment, see Bowen v. Yuckert, 
    482 U.S. 137
    , 146 (1987) (citing
    42 U.S.C. § 423(d)(5)(A)). “‘In claims in which there are no medical signs or
    laboratory findings to substantiate the existence of a medically determinable
    physical or mental impairment, the individual must be found not disabled.’”
    Ukolov v. Barnhart, 
    420 F.3d 1002
    , 1005 (9th Cir. 2005) (quoting SSR 96–4p,
    
    1996 WL 374187
    , at *1–2).
    Jones did not meet his burden of showing that the ALJ erred by severing his
    application for Title XVI benefits from his application for Title II benefits. Jones
    provided no evidence of medical treatment within his Title II eligibility window of
    July 15, 2008 to December 31, 2013, nor any medical or laboratory findings that
    would substantiate the existence of a qualifying physical or mental impairment.
    Consulting experts agreed that the record contained insufficient evidence to
    retrospectively diagnose Jones with a mental disability that began during his
    eligibility period. The ALJ made appropriate inquiry to develop the record and
    2
    properly discounted the testimonies of Jones’s mother and social worker.
    Substantial evidence supports its denial of Jones’s claim.
    AFFIRMED.
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 18-35657

Filed Date: 11/13/2019

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/13/2019