## Facts

- Pamela Keyser applied for disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income, alleging disability from physical and mental impairments, including bullous emphysema and mood/anxiety disorders.
- The administrative law judge (ALJ) denied benefits, finding Keyser could perform certain sedentary “seated cashier” jobs identified by a vocational expert.
- Mental-health evidence included a treating psychiatrist’s assessment describing moderate work-related limitations and an agency psychiatrist’s Psychiatric Review Technique Form (PRTF) reflecting mild limitations.
- Although the ALJ acknowledged mental impairment evidence, the written decision did not rate Keyser’s functioning in the four regulatory functional areas and did not append or otherwise incorporate a PRTF-mode analysis.
- The district court affirmed the denial of benefits, and Keyser appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether the ALJ committed legal error by failing to apply and document the mental-impairment “special technique” required by 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520a and 416.920a.
2. Whether any failure to comply with the special-technique documentation requirements was harmless.

## Decision

- The Ninth Circuit reversed the district court and remanded with instructions to remand to the agency for further proceedings.
- The court held the ALJ erred by not following and documenting the required special technique for evaluating mental impairments.
- The court held the error was not harmless because the omission prevented meaningful review of the ALJ’s mental-impairment evaluation at steps two and three of the sequential process.
- A dissent would have found the documentation error harmless given the record evidence.

## Legal Principles

- When a claimant has a medically determinable mental impairment, the ALJ must apply the regulatory “special technique,” including rating limitations in four functional areas: activities of daily living; social functioning; concentration, persistence, or pace; and episodes of decompensation.
- The ALJ must document application of the special technique in the written decision, either by attaching a PRTF or by incorporating the technique’s analytical framework and findings into the decision.
- Failure to apply and document the special technique is legal error.
- Harmless error is not established when the court cannot determine from the decision how the ALJ evaluated mental limitations or whether the omission affected the step-two severity and step-three listing determinations, particularly where mental-health evidence conflicts.

## Conclusion

The Ninth Circuit required remand because the ALJ did not document the mandatory special-technique findings for mental impairments, and that omission prevented effective judicial review and could have affected the disability determination.


Keyser v. Comm'r Soc. Sec. Admin., 648 F.3d 721 (9th Cir. 2011)