HURTADO v. BERRYHILL (2019)

MEMORANDUM **

Esteban Hurtado appeals the district court's order affirming the Social Security Administration's denial of his applications for Social Security and Supplemental Security Income disability benefits. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review the district court's order de novo and the agency's decision for substantial evidence and legal error. Stacy v. Colvin, 825 F.3d 563, 569 (9th Cir. 2016).

Hurtado argues that he had a “composite job” of file clerk and courier and that the ALJ violated Valencia v. Heckler, 751 F.2d 1082 (9th Cir. 1985). These arguments were not raised before the agency, and were presented for the first time in district court. Hurtado, who was represented by counsel at his administrative hearing, conceded that he worked as a file clerk and performed file clerk duties. Because Hurtado did not raise either issue, present any evidence, or challenge the vocational expert's testimony at the administrative hearing, those arguments are forfeited. See Shaibi v. Berryhill, 883 F.3d 1102, 1109-10 (9th Cir. 2017); Meanel v. Apfel, 172 F.3d 1111, 1115 (9th Cir. 1999).

AFFIRMED.