Beatriz v. Lounsburry v. Jo Anne B. Barnhart, Commissioner of Social Security

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• explaining that the Grids only work where a claimant’s functional limitations fall into certain “standardized pattern[s]”
• explaining that when a claimant has both exertional and nonexertional impairments, the ALJ must first determine whether, under the grids, the claimant’s exertional impairments by themselves warrant a finding of disability
• stating that where a 15 claimant suffers from both exertional and non-exertional limitations, the ALJ must consult the 16 grids first and—if the grids do not classify the claimant as disabled—rely on other evidence to 17 separately examine the non-exertional limitations
• construing a “significant range of . . . work” to “require a significant number of occupations” in part because Social Security Ruling 83-10 (1983
• discussing Tackett v. Apfel, 180 F.3d 1094, 1098-99 (9th Cir. 1999)
• discussing Tackett v. Apfel, 180 F.3d 1094, 1098-99 (9th Cir. 1999)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).