474 F. App'x 641
9th Cir.
2012

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Nita Almuete Paddit PALMA, Defendant—Appellant.

No. 10-50120.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

July 19, 2012.

489 Fed. Appx. 641

Submitted July 17, 2012.*

Steven Arkow, Michael J. Raphael, Esquire, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Office of the U.S. Attorney, Los Angeles, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Sherwin Carl Edelberg, Claire Navarro Espina, Law Offices of Edelberg & Espina, Tarzana, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before: SCHROEDER, THOMAS, and SILVERMAN, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM **

Nita Almuete Paddit Palma appeals from her jury-trial conviction and 42-month sentence for two counts of illegal remunerations, in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1320a-7b(b)(1)(A). Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Palma‘s counsel has filed a brief stating there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. We have provided Palma with the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed.

Our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80-81, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief on direct appeal.

Counsel‘s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.

AFFIRMED.

Thomas S. ANDRADE, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant—Appellee.

No. 11-16633.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

July 19, 2012.

489 Fed. Appx. 642

Submitted July 16, 2012.*

Steven Gilbert Rosales, Lawrence David Rohlfing, Law Offices of Lawrence D. Rohlfing, Santa Fe Springs, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellant.

Elizabeth Barry, Assistant Regional Counsel, SSA-Social Security Administration, Office of the General Counsel, San Francisco, CA, Benjamin Eli Hall, Esquire, Assistant U.S., USF-Office of the U.S. Attorney, Fresno, CA, for Defendant-Appellee.

Before: TASHIMA, CLIFTON, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM **

Thomas Andrade appeals a judgment of the district court affirming the Commissioner of Social Security‘s denial of his applications for disability insurance and supplemental security income benefits under Titles II and XVI of the Social Security Act. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and affirm.

We review de novo a district court‘s judgment upholding the denial of social security benefits. Tommasetti v. Astrue, 533 F.3d 1035, 1038 (9th Cir.2008). We must affirm the denial of benefits unless it is based on legal error or the findings of fact are not supported by substantial evidence. Valentine v. Comm‘r Soc. Sec. Admin., 574 F.3d 685, 690 (9th Cir.2009).

Mary McDonald, Ph.D., performed a psychological evaluation of Andrade which included the Performance portion of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale. Andrade achieved a Performance IQ of 72, indicating borderline intellectual functioning. In Dr. McDonald‘s view, this was consistent with her evaluation as a whole,

Notes

*
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2). The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
**
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.