Dennis Yackell v. U.s. Railroad Retirement Board

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
DENNIS YACKELL,
Petitioner,
v.
U.S. RAILROAD RETIREMENT
BOARD,
Respondent.
No. 13-70440
RRB No. 11-AP-0035
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of a Decision of the
Railroad Retirement Board
Submitted March 10, 2015**
Before: FARRIS, WARDLAW, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
Dennis Yackell petitions pro se for review of the Railroad Retirement
Board’s decision affirming the hearings officer’s determinations concerning
Yackell’s entitlement to disability benefits. We have jurisdiction under 45 U.S.C.
§ 231g. We deny the petition for review.
FILED
MAR 20 2015
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

-- 1 of 2 --

Substantial evidence and governing law support the Board’s decision that
Yackell was disabled for all substantial gainful activity as of February 1, 1998, but
was not in insured status on that date and thus was not entitled to a period of
disability under section 216(i) of the Social Security Act. See Calderon v. U.S.
R.R. Ret. Bd., 780 F.2d 812, 813 (9th Cir. 1986) (Board’s findings reviewed for
substantial evidence).
The Board’s decision that Yackell’s disability annuity began on March 1,
2007, one year prior to his application, is also supported. See 45 U.S.C. § 231d(a)
(a disability annuity may begin the first day of the sixth month after the onset of
the disability or the first day of the twelfth month prior to the date the application
for benefits was filed, whichever is later).
We reject Yackell’s contentions concerning the Board’s handling of his
earlier applications.
Yackell’s opposed motion to supplement the administrative record, filed on
January 13, 2014, is denied. See 45 U.S.C. § 355(f) (“No additional evidence shall
be received by the court[.]”)
Yackell’s motion to expedite the appeal, filed on January 30, 2015, is
granted.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
13-70440 2

-- 2 of 2 --