
    Dean C. WHITE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Michael J. ASTRUE, Commissioner, Social Security Administration, Defendant-Appellee.
    No. 11-17306.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Argued and Submitted April 16, 2013.
    Filed May 2, 2013.
    Robert Weems, Weems Law Offices, Fairfax, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellant.
    Ann L. Maley, Esquire, Assistant Regional Counsel, Social Security Administration Office of the General Counsel, San Francisco, CA, for Defendant-Appellee.
    
      Before: SCHROEDER, THOMAS, and SILVERMAN, Circuit Judges.
   MEMORANDUM

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 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. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
     