Cha Yang v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration

Ninth Circuit

Cha Yang v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration

571 F. App'x 583

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedApril 28, 2014

Docket13-15825

StatusUnpublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 571 F. App'x 583 (Cha Yang v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Cha Yang v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration, 571 F. App'x 583 (9th Cir. 2014).

Pincite

Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Cha Yang appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for attorney’s fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)(1)(A). We affirm.

The government’s litigating position was the same as the ALJ’s decision, so the district court did not err by failing to separately analyze the position of the ALJ.

The district court did not abuse its discretion in concluding that the ALJ’s decision, though in error, was substantially justified. See Meier v. Colvin, 727 F.3d 867, 869-70 (9th Cir.2013). The panel was divided as to whether Dr. Mouanoutoua’s evaluation should have been discounted based on evidence of malingering or other “clear and convincing” reasons for finding Yang not credible. See Cha Yang v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec. Admin., 488 Fed.Appx. 203 (9th Cir.2012). The majority held that the ALJ’s malingering finding was not supported by substantial evidence and that the ALJ’s other reasons for discounting Yang’s credibility, although “potentially legitimate,” were not articulated with sufficient specificity to allow for meaningful judicial review. Id. at 205-06; see Benton ex rel. Benton v. Barnhart, 331 F.3d 1030, 1040-41 (9th Cir.2003). We therefore remanded for “further findings evaluating the credibility of Yang’s complaints.” Yang, 488 Fed.Appx. at 206. The district court carefully reviewed this record, and appropriately weighed the disagreement among the panel members, in determining that the government’s position was substantially justified. See Meier, 727 F.3d at 873; Gonzales v. Free Speech Coal., 408 F.3d 613, 619 (9th Cir. 2005).

Each side shall bear its own costs on appeal.

AFFIRMED.

**

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

MEMORANDUM **

Cha Yang appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for attorney’s fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)(1)(A). We affirm.

The government’s litigating position was the same as the ALJ’s decision, so the district court did not err by failing to separately analyze the position of the ALJ.

The district court did not abuse its discretion in concluding that the ALJ’s decision, though in error, was substantially justified. See Meier v. Colvin, 727 F.3d 867, 869-70 (9th Cir.2013). The panel was divided as to whether Dr. Mouanoutoua’s evaluation should have been discounted based on evidence of malingering or other “clear and convincing” reasons for finding Yang not credible. See Cha Yang v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec. Admin., 488 Fed.Appx. 203 (9th Cir.2012). The majority held that the ALJ’s malingering finding was not supported by substantial evidence and that the ALJ’s other reasons for discounting Yang’s credibility, although “potentially legitimate,” were not articulated with sufficient specificity to allow for meaningful judicial review. Id. at 205-06; see Benton ex rel. Benton v. Barnhart, 331 F.3d 1030, 1040-41 (9th Cir.2003). We therefore remanded for “further findings evaluating the credibility of Yang’s complaints.” Yang, 488 Fed.Appx. at 206. The district court carefully reviewed this record, and appropriately weighed the disagreement among the panel members, in determining that the government’s position was substantially justified. See Meier, 727 F.3d at 873; Gonzales v. Free Speech Coal., 408 F.3d 613, 619 (9th Cir. 2005).

Each side shall bear its own costs on appeal.

AFFIRMED.

**

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

571 F. App'x 583, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cha-yang-v-commissioner-of-social-security-administration-ca9-2014.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack