Dean C. White v. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner, Social Security Administration

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
DEAN C. WHITE,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner,
Social Security Administration,
Defendant - Appellee.
No. 11-17306
D.C. No. 3:10-cv-02124-CRB
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California
Charles R. Breyer, District Judge, Presiding
Argued and Submitted April 16, 2013
San Francisco, California
Before: SCHROEDER, THOMAS, and SILVERMAN, Circuit Judges.
Dean White appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor
of the Commissioner. We have jurisdiction to consider the due process claim and
FILED
MAY 02 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2
review the administrative decision for substantial evidence. Udd v. Massanari,
245 F.3d 1096, 1099-1100 (9th Cir. 2001). We affirm.
Substantial evidence supports the administrative law judge’s finding that
Social Security Ruling 91-5p does not apply because White was represented by a
non-attorney when he applied for benefits and sought reconsideration of the denial
of benefits in 1990 and 1991. White’s request for reconsideration designated Carol
Nuss, a paralegal and friend, in writing as his non-attorney representative. It was
signed by both Nuss and White and filed with the Social Security office. This
written designation substantially complied with 20 C.F.R. § 416.1507. Because at
least one of the reasons provided by the administrative law judge for exercising his
discretion to deny the motion to reopen is supported by substantial evidence,
White’s due process claim fails.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --