Cruz Villa v. Carolyn W. Colvin , 540 F. App'x 639 ( 2013 )


Menu:
  •                                NOT FOR PUBLICATION
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                         FILED
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT                          SEP 23 2013
    MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
    CRUZ VILLA,                                        No. 12-56480
    Plaintiff - Appellant,           D.C. No. 2:11-cv-08992-OP
    v.
    MEMORANDUM*
    CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Commissioner
    of Social Security,
    Defendant - Appellee.
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Central District of California
    Oswald Parada, Magistrate Judge, Presiding**
    Submitted July 12, 2013***
    Before:           HUG, FARRIS, and LEAVY, Circuit Judges.
    Cruz Villa appeals from the district court’s judgment affirming the
    Commissioner of Social Security’s denial of her application for Social Security
    *
    This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
    except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
    **
    The parties consented to proceed before a magistrate judge. See 
    28 U.S.C. § 636
    (c).
    ***
    The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
    without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
    disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income benefits under
    Titles II and XVI of the Social Security Act. We have jurisdiction under 
    28 U.S.C. § 1291
    , and we affirm.
    We review de novo the district court’s decision upholding the denial of
    benefits. Molina v. Astrue, 
    674 F.3d 1104
    , 1110 (9th Cir. 2012). We must affirm
    the denial of benefits unless it is based on legal error or the findings of fact are not
    supported by substantial evidence. 
    Id.
    Substantial evidence supports the Administrative Law Judge’s (“ALJ”)
    determination that Villa had the residual functional capacity to perform her past
    relevant work as a bus driver. The ALJ properly relied on the testimony of
    vocational expert Trost because Trost provided a reasonable explanation for her
    conclusion that, even though the Dictionary of Occupational Titles lists the
    occupation of bus driver as generally performed at the medium exertional level,
    Villa performed her past job at a light exertional level. See Massachi v. Astrue,
    
    486 F.3d 1149
    , 1153 (9th Cir. 2007). Because Trost provided sufficient support
    for her conclusion, the ALJ did not err in failing to discuss vocational expert
    Schneider’s earlier testimony. See 
    id.
     at 1154 n.19.
    2
    Finally, Villa’s statement that, as a bus driver, she sat for nine hours in a
    twelve-hour workday is consistent with the ALJ’s finding that Villa could sit for
    six hours in an eight-hour workday.
    AFFIRMED.
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 12-56480

Citation Numbers: 540 F. App'x 639

Judges: Farris, Hug, Leavy

Filed Date: 9/23/2013

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/7/2023