FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
MAY 18 2017
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
VIRGINIA ANN CALDWELL-GRANT, No. 15-16919
Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 2:14-cv-01902-SPL
v.
MEMORANDUM*
NANCY A. BERRYHILL, Acting
Commissioner of Social Security,
Defendant-Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
Steven Paul Logan, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted May 16, 2017**
Before: D.W. NELSON, TROTT, and OWENS, Circuit Judges.
Virginia Caldwell-Grant appeals from the district court’s decision affirming
the Commissioner of Social Security’s denial of her application for supplemental
security income under Title XVI of the Social Security Act. We have jurisdiction
*
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).
under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, and we affirm. See Ghanim v.
Colvin, 763 F.3d 1154, 1159 (9th Cir. 2014).
The administrative law judge (“ALJ”) did not err in finding, at step five of
the sequential evaluation process, that Caldwell-Grant had transferable work skills.
The parties agree that at the time of the ALJ’s decision, Caldwell-Grant was
limited to light work and was of advanced age with a high school education, and
therefore would be considered not disabled under the Medical-Vocational
Guidelines, or “grids,” if she had transferable skills. See 20 C.F.R. Pt. 404, Subpt.
P, App. 2, 202-06 & 202.07. The vocational expert’s testimony satisfied the
Commissioner’s burden of establishing specific work skills—stock checking,
merchandise cataloging, and inventory marking—that Caldwell-Grant had acquired
from her past semi-skilled work as a stock clerk. See Rounds v. Comm’r Soc. Sec.
Admin., 807 F.3d 996, 1002 (9th Cir. 2015); Bray v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec. Admin.,
554 F.3d 1219, 1223-24 (9th Cir. 2009). These transferable skills enable
Caldwell-Grant to perform jobs as an order filler, layaway clerk, and
lost-and-found clerk. Accordingly, substantial evidence supports the ALJ’s finding
that Caldwell-Grant’s skills were transferable to a significant range of semi-skilled
work that she could perform, given her age, education, work experience, and
residual functional capacity. See 20 C.F.R. Pt. 404, Subpt. P, App. 2, 202.00(c)
2
(providing that work skills must be readily transferable to a significant range of
jobs); cf. Lounsburry v. Barnhart, 468 F.3d 1111, 1117 (9th Cir. 2006) (holding
that transferability of skills to only one occupation was insufficient). We therefore
affirm the district court’s judgment.
AFFIRMED.
3