Esther Argueta v. Nancy Berryhill
703 F. App'x 460
| 9th Cir. | 2017Background
- Esther Diaz Argueta applied for Social Security disability insurance benefits (Title II) and supplemental security income (Title XVI); ALJ denied benefits and the district court affirmed.
- ALJ found Argueta performed sedentary produce-sorting work from Feb–May 2010 after an on-the-job injury.
- The ALJ and vocational expert characterized the job as unskilled (SVP 2) and sedentary.
- Earnings for the months worked averaged above the 2010 substantial gainful activity (SGA) threshold, and the work fell within 15 years of the ALJ decision.
- Argueta argued the work was an unsuccessful work attempt (UWA) and therefore should not be treated as past relevant work; ALJ found the job ended for non-medical reasons (layoff) and would have continued with a chair.
- The Ninth Circuit reviewed de novo and affirmed the denial of benefits.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Argueta’s 2010 sedentary sorter job qualifies as past relevant work at step four | The job was an unsuccessful work attempt and should not count as past relevant work | The job met criteria for past relevant work (timeliness, duration, SGA level, unskilled) | Job qualifies as past relevant work; ALJ did not err |
| Whether the 2010 work was substantial gainful activity (SGA) | Work should be disregarded as UWA because of claimant’s impairments | Earnings averaged above SGA threshold; job ended for layoff, not impairment | Earnings and testimony support finding of SGA; not an UWA |
| Whether the work was learned and long enough to be past relevant work | Implicit: too brief or affected by impairment to count | Job was unskilled (SVP 2) and lasted long enough to learn (within 30 days) | Job duration and SVP satisfy past relevant work requirement |
| Timing of UWA claim relative to alleged disability onset | UWA doctrine applies regardless | UWA cannot logically precede alleged onset of disability; claimant alleged disability after stopping work | Court agreed UWA concept does not apply to work before claimed onset; Argueta did not claim disability until after May 2010 |
Key Cases Cited
- Molina v. Astrue, 674 F.3d 1104 (9th Cir. 2012) (standard of review and substantial evidence review framework)
- Stacy v. Colvin, 825 F.3d 563 (9th Cir. 2016) (claimant bears burden at step four to show inability to perform past relevant work)
- Gatliff v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec. Admin., 172 F.3d 690 (9th Cir. 1999) (definition and treatment of unsuccessful work attempts under SSA rules)