Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 8 views

    Melendez v. Commissioner of SS, 1st Cir. (1997)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The US Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's decision upholding the Commissioner's denial of disability benefits to Gilberto Melendez. The appellate court agreed that the vocational expert's testimony adequately considered Melendez's moderate mental limitations, though the expert did not explicitly discuss each one. Additionally, while some evidence post-dated the insured period, the expert properly relied on residual functional capacity assessments from that critical time. The administrative law judge's decision demonstrated proper consideration of the overall evidence and reasoning, meeting the legal standard of articulation required.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content

    You might also like

    Melendez v. Commissioner of SS, 1st Cir. (1997)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    8 views8 pages
    The US Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's decision upholding the Commissioner's denial of disability benefits to Gilberto Melendez. The appellate court agreed that the vocational expert's testimony adequately considered Melendez's moderate mental limitations, though the expert did not explicitly discuss each one. Additionally, while some evidence post-dated the insured period, the expert properly relied on residual functional capacity assessments from that critical time. The administrative law judge's decision demonstrated proper consideration of the overall evidence and reasoning, meeting the legal standard of articulation required.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1997-09-09 Precedential Status: Precedential Docket: 97-1095

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The US Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's decision upholding the Commissioner's denial of disability benefits to Gilberto Melendez. The appellate court agreed that the vocational expert's testimony adequately considered Melendez's moderate mental limitations, though the expert did not explicitly discuss each one. Additionally, while some evidence post-dated the insured period, the expert properly relied on residual functional capacity assessments from that critical time. The administrative law judge's decision demonstrated proper consideration of the overall evidence and reasoning, meeting the legal standard of articulation required.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    8 views8 pages

    Melendez v. Commissioner of SS, 1st Cir. (1997)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The US Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's decision upholding the Commissioner's denial of disability benefits to Gilberto Melendez. The appellate court agreed that the vocational expert's testimony adequately considered Melendez's moderate mental limitations, though the expert did not explicitly discuss each one. Additionally, while some evidence post-dated the insured period, the expert properly relied on residual functional capacity assessments from that critical time. The administrative law judge's decision demonstrated proper consideration of the overall evidence and reasoning, meeting the legal standard of articulation required.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 8

    USCA1 Opinion

    [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
    ____________________

    No. 97-1095

    GILBERTO MELENDEZ,

    Plaintiff, Appellant,

    v.

    COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,

    Defendant, Appellee.

    ____________________

    APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

    FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO

    [Hon. Juan M. Perez-Gimenez, U.S. District Judge]


    ___________________

    ____________________

    Before

    Torruella, Chief Judge,


    ___________
    Stahl and Lynch, Circuit Judges.
    ______________

    ____________________

    Melba N. Rivera-Camacho and Melba N. Rivera-Camacho & Assocs.


    ________________________
    __________________________________
    brief for appellant.
    Guillermo Gil, United
    ______________
    United

    States

    Attorney,

    States Attorney,
    and

    Donna

    Edna Rosario, Assist


    _____________

    McCarthy,

    Assistant

    Regio

    _______________
    Counsel, Social Security Administration, on brief for appellee.

    ____________________

    September 3, 1997
    ____________________

    Per Curiam.
    __________

    Claimant-appellant

    Gilberto Melendez

    appeals from

    a judgment

    of the

    district court

    affirming a

    decision of the Commissioner of Social Security that Melendez

    was

    not entitled to

    reviewed

    the record

    essentially

    and

    was

    this case.

    parties'

    posed

    adequate under

    Having carefully

    briefs,

    we

    affirm

    by the district court in

    November 13, 1996.

    hypothetical question

    ("VE")

    the

    for the reasons stated

    its opinion dated

    the

    disability benefits.

    to

    We

    are persuaded that

    the Vocational

    the particular

    Expert

    circumstances of

    The VE's testimony indicates that

    he considered

    all eight areas in which appellant was found to have moderate

    mental limitations, though

    areas.

    after

    he did not

    Finally, although the

    the

    insured

    functional capacity

    period,

    recite each of

    VE did mention

    the

    assessments for

    VE

    relied

    these

    some evidence

    on

    the critical

    residual

    period in

    reaching

    his

    conclusion that

    appellant could

    perform past

    jobs.

    We

    add

    suggestion,

    required

    the

    to

    simply

    contrary

    Administrative Law

    recite

    appellant.

    that,

    See Stein
    ___ _____

    every piece

    of

    Judge

    to

    ("ALJ") was

    evidence

    v. Sullivan, 966
    ________

    appellant's

    not

    that favored

    F.2d 317,

    319 (7th

    Cir. 1992) (noting that the level of articulation required is

    not precise).

    the evidence as

    reasoning.

    The ALJ's decision reveals that

    a whole,

    and it indicates

    No more was required.

    -2-

    he considered

    the path of

    his

    Affirmed.
    _________

    -3-

    You might also like