FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION APR 8 2020 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

LACEY ANN GREEN, No. 17-35346 Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 3:15-cv-02316-JO v. MEMORANDUM* ANDREW M. SAUL, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Oregon Robert E. Jones, District Judge, Presiding Submitted April 6, 2020** Before: TROTT, SILVERMAN, and TALLMAN, Circuit Judges Lacy Green appeals the district court’s order affirming the Social Security Administration’s denial of Green’s applications for disability benefits. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review the district court de novo

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). and the agency for substantial evidence and legal error. Garrison v. Colvin, 759 F.3d 995, 1009-10 (9th Cir. 2014). We affirm.

The ALJ erred by not specifically asking the vocational expert whether his opinion was consistent with the Dictionary of Occupational Titles (DOT).

Massachi v. Astrue, 486 F.3d 1149, 1153 (9th Cir. 2007). However, there is no conflict between the DOT and the vocational expert’s opinion or Green’s social limitations. The DOT specifically provides that a small products assembler position involves no significant interaction with other people. Dictionary of Occupational Titles § 706.684-011 (4th ed. 1991). Therefore, the procedural error is harmless. Massachi, 486 F.3d at 1154 n.19.

AFFIRMED.