Evelyn E. Wright v. Larry G. Massanari, Acting Commissioner of Social Security Administration

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “the ALJ and consulting vocational experts are not bound by the Dictionary in making disability determinations because the Social Security regulations do not obligate them to rely on the Dictionary’s classifications”
• explaining 2 “An individual’s residual functional capacity is the most the individual can still do despite his or her impairment-related limitations.” SSR 16-3P, 2016 WL 1119029, at (Mar. 16, 2016
• considering SSR 83-12, and finding “no support” for claimant’s attempt “to use the fact that she is not capable of doing all of the jobs in the light work category due to her nonexertional limitation ... to drop her category level down to sedentary”
• when a claimant’s impairments “do not precisely match any specific rule,” the RFC “is used as the appropriate framework to determine whether she is disabled
• “[T]he ALJ and consulting vocational experts are not bound by the Dictionary in making disability determinations because the Social Security regulations do not obligate them to rely on the Dictionary’s classifications.”
• “Our role is not to resolve conflicting evidence in the record…”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).