Jorgensen v. Swope

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a claimant’s failure to raise an issue “at both her hearing before the ALJ and the Appeals Council” constitutes forfeiture
• holding that 23 24 1 statement that the plaintiff would have “decreased concentration skills” was too vague to 2 be useful in the disability determination
• holding that statement that the plaintiff would have “decreased 7 concentration skills” was too vague to be useful in the disability determination
• holding that statement that the plaintiff would 21 have “decreased concentration skills” was too vague to be useful in the disability determination
• holding that statement that the plaintiff would have “decreased concentration 12 skills” was too vague to be useful in the disability determination
• holding that statement that the plaintiff would have “decreased concentration skills” was 10 too vague to be useful in the disability determination

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).