USCA1 Opinion

May 25, 1993

[NOT FOR PUBLICATION]
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
____________________
No. 92-1897
CESAR RAMIREZ-MORALES,
Plaintiff, Appellant,
v.
SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES,
Defendant, Appellee.
____________________
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO
[Hon. Raymond L. Acosta, U.S. District Judge]
___________________
____________________
Before
Breyer, Chief Judge,
___________
Torruella and Cyr, Circuit Judges.
______________
____________________

Raymond Rivera Esteves and Juan A. Hernandez Rivera on brief

______________________
_________________________
appellant.
Daniel F. Lopez Romo, United States Attorney, Jose Vazq
_______________________
__________
Garcia, Assistant United States Attorney, and Donna C. McCart
______
________________
Assistant Regional Counsel, Department of Health and Human Servic
on brief for appellee.
____________________
____________________

Per Curiam.
__________
and

conclude

that

We have carefully reviewed the

substantial

evidence

record

supports

the

Secretary's determination that claimant was not disabled when

his insured
time, the
range of

status expired,

and that

physical and mental abilities to

light, unskilled jobs

claimant's arguments

and,

finding

the magistrate-judge's

enumerated by

We have considered all

them without

affirm the judgment of the district court

basis of

at that

perform a narrow

such as those

the Administrative Law Judge ("ALJ").

of

he retained,

report

merit,

essentially on the
as adopted

by

the

argues that

the

district court.
We add these
hypothetical posed

comments.

to the

Claimant

vocational

expert was

defective

because it

did not include a

the ALJ ultimately

inability to
light

jobs

non-exertional impairment that

found the claimant to

possess, namely an

perform frequent stooping and

________
require,

at

most, only

bending.

occasional

Frustaglia v. Secretary of HHS, 829 F.2d 192, 195

__________
_________________
1987).

If a person can do some stooping and

by implication,
base is

the ALJ found here,

virtually intact."

Ruling 85-15).
the ALJ found
light

claimant could

occupational

stooping.

base

(1st Cir.

bending, which,

Social

list of light-work
perform are a

which

stooping.1

the "light occupational

Id. (quoting
___

The narrowed

First,

does not

Security
jobs which

sub-set of
involve

Cf. Social Security 85-15 (most medium,

___

the

frequent
heavy and

____________________
1.
Stooping is considered the least strenuous of the
bending postures, and involves bending the body from the
waist downward and forward. Social Security Ruling 85-15.

very

heavy jobs

require the

ability to

stoop frequently).

Thus, the

frequent stooping restriction has

little, if any,

relevance to the light occupational base.

Second, since claimant
work

determination,

restriction
narrowed

does

range

not,
of

claimant could do.2

an examination
occasionally
consulted

per

is

specific

the
argued,

light

occasionally.

further

jobs

for the Secretary, found

stoop.

Dr.

Thus, the

Grovas,

the light

no-frequent-stooping

the

limit
ALJ

Ortiz, a neurologist who

by claimant,

the range of

se,

as

Dr.

does not contest

an

also determined

the

decided
performed

that claimant could

orthopaedic surgeon
that he

could bend

ALJ's hypothetical, as delimited to

light work, adequately

took into account

that

virtually all light work jobs require no more than occasional

stooping,

an

shows, remained
Keating
_______
1988).

activity
within

which, the

claimant's residual

v. Secretary of HHS,
_________________
Moreover,

advantage of,

the

848 F.2d

claimant

the opportunity

and correct any perceived

uncontradicted

had,

capacity.

See
___

271, 274

(1st Cir.

but

not

to pose his

inadequacies.

evidence

did

take

own hypothetical

Torres v. Secretary
______
_________

of HHS, 870 F.2d 742, 746 (1st Cir. 1989).

______

____________________
2.
And, the capacity for light unskilled work represents,
overall, a substantial vocational scope for
a younger
individual (age 18-49) such as claimant who was 36 when his
insured status expired.
Medical-Vocational Guidelines, 20
C.F.R. Part 404, Subpt. P, App. 2,
202.00 (g).

-3-

Finally,
mechanically
Guidelines,
"Grid"),

the

apply
20

to

520,

the

C.F.R.

not, as

rules
Part

of

524

Cir.

Medical-Vocational

404, Subpt.

still do.

(1st

claimant contends,

the

determine the availability

the claimant could

F.2d

ALJ did

P,

App.

(the

of other work

that

Ortiz v. Secretary of HHS, 890

_____
________________
1989).

After considering

the

individualized evidence

offered by a vocational

expert, the

ALJ merely referred to a

particular rule3 as a

"framework",

i.e.,

additional

Claimant's

assertion that

using a Grid
indicate

ALJ's

for
the

the

the ALJ

failed

claimant's physical

decision

clearly

ultimate

ALJ "disposed

rule is simply incorrect.

that

effect of

support

to

Nor

decision.

of" the

does the record

consider the

cumulative

and mental impairments.

manifests

that

case

both

The

claimant's

physical and mental residual capacity were taken into account

in determining

a narrowed light work

occupational base, and

substantial evidence supports those predicate findings.

Affirmed.
________

____________________
3.
The ALJ referred to
Rule 202.21 which directs a
conclusion of "not disabled" for individuals like claimant:
younger, with a high school education and non-transferable
prior work skills.
-4-