The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
14-17302•Frank Salmeron Walker v. CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Commissioner Social Security Administration
14-17302Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMar 3, 2016
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
FRANK SALMERON WALKER,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Commissioner
Social Security Administration,
Defendant - Appellee.
No. 14-17302
D.C. No. 5:13-cv-05037-BLF
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California
Beth Labson Freeman, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted February 24, 2016**
Before: LEAVY, FERNANDEZ, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.
Frank Salmeron Walker appeals pro se from the district court’s summary
judgment affirming the Administrative Law Judge’s (“ALJ”) decision denying his
request that the Social Security Administration waive recovery of overpaid
FILED
MAR 03 2016
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
-- 1 of 2 --
disability insurance benefits. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We
review de novo, Anderson v. Sullivan, 914 F.2d 1121, 1122 (9th Cir. 1990), and we
affirm.
The ALJ applied the proper legal standard and substantial evidence
supported the ALJ’s finding that Walker was “not without fault” and therefore did
not qualify for a waiver of recovery for overpayment. 42 U.S.C. § 404(b); see also
McCarthy v. Apfel, 221 F.3d 1119, 1126 (9th Cir. 2000) (discussing “without fault”
in the context of a waiver of recovery for overpayment of disability insurance
benefits); Anderson, 914 F.2d at 1122 (the ALJ’s “refusal to waive repayment
should be affirmed if supported by substantial evidence and if the [ALJ] applied
the proper legal standard”).
We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued
in the opening brief. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).
All pending motions and requests are denied.
AFFIRMED.
14-17302 2
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.