Jessica Bixler v. Carolyn W. Colvin

609 F. App'x 947
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedJuly 21, 2015
Docket13-35864
StatusUnpublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 609 F. App'x 947 (Jessica Bixler v. Carolyn W. Colvin) 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
Jessica Bixler v. Carolyn W. Colvin, 609 F. App'x 947 (9th Cir. 2015).

Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Jessica Bixler appeals the district court’s affirmance of the denial of her application for Social Security Supplemental Security Income. We vacate and remand for further proceedings.

The Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) erred in evaluating the vocational expert’s testimony. The ALJ discounted Bixler’s first hypothetical even though that hypothetical was based on evidence — Section I of a Mental Residual Functional Capacity Assessment (“MRFCA”), from an acceptable medical source — that the ALJ herself had previously credited. The ALJ’s stated reasons for rejecting Bixler’s first hypothetical to the vocational expert contradict the ALJ’s decision to credit Section I of the MRFCA.

Because the vocational expert’s testimony was critical to the ALJ’s analysis at step five, see Tackett v. Apfel, 180 F.3d 1094, 1100-02 (9th Cir.1999), we cannot say that the ALJ’s error in evaluating that testimony was harmless. We do not reach the question of whether there was substan *948 tial evidence on the record as a whole supporting the denial of benefits, because the ALJ’s errors in analysis require further proceedings. We therefore vacate the district court’s judgment and remand to the district court with instructions to remand this case to the agency for further proceedings.

We need not reach Bixler’s other arguments. Costs on appeal are awarded to Bixler.

VACATED and REMANDED.

*

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

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
609 F. App'x 947, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jessica-bixler-v-carolyn-w-colvin-ca9-2015.