Denise White v. NANCY A. BERRYHILL, Acting Commissioner of Social Security

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
DENISE WHITE,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
NANCY A. BERRYHILL, Acting
Commissioner of Social Security,
Defendant-Appellee.
No. 17-55561
D.C. No.
5:15-cv-01198-VAP-KES
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
Virginia A. Phillips, Chief Judge, Presiding
Submitted April 5, 2019**
Before: GOODWIN, FARRIS, and LEAVY, Circuit Judges.
Denise White appeals pro se the district court’s judgment affirming the
Commissioner of Social Security’s denial of White’s applications for disability
insurance benefits and supplemental security income under Titles II and XVI of the
Social Security Act. Reviewing de novo, we may set aside a denial of benefits
* 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).
FILED
APR 9 2019
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 17-55561
only if it is not supported by substantial evidence, or if the administrative law
judge (“ALJ”) applied the wrong legal standard. Molina v. Astrue, 674 F.3d 1104,
1110 (9th Cir. 2012). We affirm.
The ALJ’s findings concerning White’s back injury are supported by
substantial evidence. See id. at 1111 (if the record contains evidence “susceptible
to more than one rational interpretation, we must uphold the ALJ’s findings if they
are supported by inferences reasonably drawn from the record”); Thomas v.
Barnhart, 278 F.3d 948, 957 (9th Cir. 2002) (“The opinions of non-treating or non-
examining physicians may also serve as substantial evidence when the opinions are
consistent with independent clinical findings or other evidence in the record.”).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --