Rosalba Beltran Quintero v. Frank Bisignano

Summary

The United States District Court for the Central District of California reviewed the denial of Plaintiff’s application for supplemental security income. The court held that the ALJ’s decision was supported by substantial evidence and that reliance on vocational-expert testimony addressing an additional, rejected walker limitation did not constitute material error; the Commissioner’s decision was affirmed.

Holdings

1. The ALJ properly relied on the vocational expert's testimony because the hypothetical included every limitation assessed in the RFC and added an extra, more restrictive limitation that the ALJ later rejected.
2. The Commissioner's decision was supported by substantial evidence and free from material error; Plaintiff failed to establish grounds for reversal or remand.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the ALJ erred by relying at step five on vocational-expert testimony responding to a hypothetical that included a front-wheeled-walker limitation that was not included in the final residual functional capacity assessment.
2. Whether any error in the hypothetical or residual functional capacity assessment warranted reversal or remand.

Disposition

affirmed