Christine Jane Ortega v. KILOLO KIJAKAZI, Acting Commissioner of Social Security

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
CHRISTINE JANE ORTEGA,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
KILOLO KIJAKAZI, Acting
Commissioner of Social Security,
Defendant-Appellee.
No. 19-35028
D.C. No. 3:17-cv-01988-BR
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Oregon
Anna J. Brown, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted September 7, 2021**
Before: THOMAS, Chief Judge, and HAWKINS and McKEOWN, Circuit Judges.
Christine Ortega appeals the district court’s judgment affirming the
Commissioner of Social Security’s denial of her application for disability
insurance benefits and supplemental security income under Titles II and XVI of the
FILED
SEP 9 2021
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).

-- 1 of 2 --

Social Security Act. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review the
district court’s judgment de novo. Ford v. Saul, 950 F.3d 1141, 1153-54 (9th Cir.
2020). We affirm.
Ortega’s testimony regarding the amounts of sitting, standing, and walking
required in her past relevant work as a delivery driver provided substantial
evidence in support of the administrative law judge’s (“ALJ”) finding that the
work was sedentary as actually performed. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1567(a),
416.967(a) (defining sedentary work). See also Coleman v. Saul, 979 F.3d 751,
755 (9th Cir. 2020) (defining substantial evidence). Accordingly, substantial
evidence supports the ALJ’s finding, at Step Four of the sequential analysis, that
Ortega could perform her past relevant work as actually performed, and she
therefore was not disabled. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(iv),
416.920(a)(4)(iv). See also Ford, 950 F.3d at 1149.
AFFIRMED.
2

-- 2 of 2 --