COLLEEN KAUWOH V. NANCY BERRYHILL, No. 16-56030 (9th Cir. 2017)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED NOV 20 2017 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT COLLEEN MARIE KAUWOH, Plaintiff-Appellant, No. U.S. COURT OF APPEALS 16-56030 D.C. No. 3:15-cv-01621-JLS-MDD v. NANCY A. BERRYHILL, Acting Commissioner Social Security, MEMORANDUM * Defendant-Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California Janis L. Sammartino, District Judge, Presiding Submitted November 15, 2017** Before: CANBY, TROTT, and GRABER, Circuit Judges. Colleen Marie Kauwoh appeals the district court’s decision affirming the Commissioner of Social Security’s denial of her applications for disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income under Titles II and XVI of the * 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). Social Security Act. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, Zavalin v. Colvin, 778 F.3d 842, 845 (9th Cir. 2015), and we affirm. At step five of the sequential analysis, the administrative law judge (“ALJ”) did not err in relying on the testimony of a vocational expert. The ALJ’s residual functional capacity finding included a limitation of a sit/stand option. Although the hypothetical question posed by the ALJ did not include this limitation, the vocational expert’s testimony shows that she understood that Kauwoh had this limitation and she incorporated this limitation in identifying the jobs that Kauwoh could perform. See Molina v. Astrue, 674 F.3d 1104, 1121 (9th Cir. 2012) (holding that court will uphold ALJ’s findings if their logic may reasonably be discerned); cf. Bayliss v. Barnhart, 427 F.3d 1211, 1217-18 (9th Cir. 2005) (holding that in order properly to rely on a vocational expert’s testimony, the ALJ must present the expert with a hypothetical question that includes all of the limitations that the ALJ finds credible and supported by substantial evidence in the record). AFFIRMED. 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.