Check how courts have cited this case. Use our free citator for the most current treatment.
No. 8642706
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Mendoza v. Astrue
No. 8642706 · Decided June 5, 2007
No. 8642706·Ninth Circuit · 2007·
FlawFinder last updated this page Apr. 2, 2026
Case Details
Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided
June 5, 2007
Citation
No. 8642706
Disposition
See opinion text.
Full Opinion
MEMORANDUM **** In 2006, Antoinette Maiwurm appealed the denial of disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income, arguing that the administrative law judge (ALJ) did not properly consider her treat *165 ing and examining physicians’ opinions relating to the impact of her mental health on her ability to work. After filing her notice of appeal, Maiwurm died. Maiwurm’s death mooted her Title XVI claim for SSI benefits. See Parra v. Astrue, 481 F.3d 742, 745 (9th Cir.2007). Although the ALJ erred in failing to address portions of the treating and examining physicians’ opinions, we conclude that with respect to Maiwurm’s remaining disability claim such error was harmless for the reasons stated by the magistrate judge. We therefore affirm the denial of disability insurance benefits. AFFIRMED. ThiS disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Plain English Summary
MEMORANDUM **** In 2006, Antoinette Maiwurm appealed the denial of disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income, arguing that the administrative law judge (ALJ) did not properly consider her treat *165 ing and examining ph
Key Points
01MEMORANDUM **** In 2006, Antoinette Maiwurm appealed the denial of disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income, arguing that the administrative law judge (ALJ) did not properly consider her treat *165 ing and examining ph
02Maiwurm’s death mooted her Title XVI claim for SSI benefits.
03Although the ALJ erred in failing to address portions of the treating and examining physicians’ opinions, we conclude that with respect to Maiwurm’s remaining disability claim such error was harmless for the reasons stated by the magistrate
04We therefore affirm the denial of disability insurance benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
MEMORANDUM **** In 2006, Antoinette Maiwurm appealed the denial of disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income, arguing that the administrative law judge (ALJ) did not properly consider her treat *165 ing and examining ph
FlawCheck shows no negative treatment for Mendoza v. Astrue in the current circuit citation data.
This case was decided on June 5, 2007.
Use the citation No. 8642706 and verify it against the official reporter before filing.