Lockwood v. Commissioner 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.

• concluding that the ALJ did not mechanically apply age categories where he relied on VE testimony in finding the plaintiff to be not disabled
• holding that “[w]here a claimant is within a few days or a few months of reaching an older age category (a ‘borderline situation’), an ALJ has discretion, but is not required, to use the older age category”
• holding that “[w]here a claimant is within a few days or a few months of reaching an older age category (a ‘borderline situation’), an ALJ has discretion, but is not required, to use the older age category”
• explaining that the “HALLEX does not impose judicially enforceable duties on either the ALJ or this court”
• holding “the ALJ did not err because she was 27 required by regulation only to consider whether to use the older age category.”
• applying the claimant’s age on the date the ALJ issued the decision

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).