MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

RALPH ZAREFSKY, Magistrate Judge.

After remand from this Court, the Administrative Law Judge found that Plaintiff Lori Rochelle Higgins had severe impairments consisting of hearing loss, a schizoaffective disorder, and polysubstance dependence, in remission. [AR 283] However, he found that she retained the residual capacity to perform light work, with certain limitations. [AR 286] She could not perform any of her past relevant work [AR 292] but she could perform other work which exists in the economy. [AR 293] Accordingly, she was not disabled. [AR 294]

In this Court, Plaintiff appears to challenge the Administrative Law Judge's determinations that she was not entirely credible (Plaintiff's Memorandum at 5:19), but Plaintiff does not identify any improper determinations. Plaintiff also says that the Administrative Law Judge improperly rejected Plaintiff's statements regarding her subjective symptoms (Plaintiff's Memorandum at 6:4), but does not identify any such symptoms or how they were improperly rejected. Plaintiff cites familiar law to the effect that a person does not need to be completely incapacitated in order to qualify for disability benefits (Plaintiff's Memorandum at 6-8), but does not explain how the Administrative Law Judge's assessment of her activities fits within this body of law. The Administrative Law Judge simply found that Plaintiff's activities were not inconsistent with her residual functional capacity. [AR 287]

This Court is limited to a determination as to whether the Commissioner committed errors of law and whether substantial evidence supported her decision. Drouin v. Sullivan, 966 F.2d 1255, 1257 (9th Cir. 1992). Plaintiff has identified no errors of law, and the Court has seen none, and substantial evidence backs the decision. Accordingly, the Commissioner's decision is affirmed.

IT IS SO ORDERED.