Lacey Ann Green v. ANDREW M. SAUL, Commissioner of Social Security

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

LACEY ANN GREEN,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
ANDREW M. SAUL, Commissioner of
Social Security,
Defendant-Appellee.
No. 17-35346
D.C. No. 3:15-cv-02316-JO
MEMORANDUM
*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Oregon
Robert E. Jones, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted April 6, 2020
**
Before: TROTT, SILVERMAN, and TALLMAN, Circuit Judges
Lacy Green appeals the district court’s order affirming the Social Security
Administration’s denial of Green’s applications for disability benefits. We have
jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review the district court de novo
FILED
APR 8 2020
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
* *
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

and the agency for substantial evidence and legal error. Garrison v. Colvin, 759
F.3d 995, 1009-10 (9th Cir. 2014). We affirm.
The ALJ erred by not specifically asking the vocational expert whether his
opinion was consistent with the Dictionary of Occupational Titles (DOT).
Massachi v. Astrue, 486 F.3d 1149, 1153 (9th Cir. 2007). However, there is no
conflict between the DOT and the vocational expert’s opinion or Green’s social
limitations. The DOT specifically provides that a small products assembler
position involves no significant interaction with other people. Dictionary of
Occupational Titles § 706.684-011 (4th ed.1991). Therefore, the procedural error
is harmless. Massachi, 486 F.3d at 1154 n.19.
AFFIRMED.
2