Maria Pinto v. Larry G. Massanari, Acting Commissioner of the 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 a 24 district court may not affirm the ALJ's decision on a ground that the ALJ did not invoke in making his decision
• noting that “[t]he ability to communicate is an important skill to be considered when determining what jobs are available to a claimant” and remanding to the ALJ to clarify how the claimant’s “language skills factor into the disability determination”
• stating a court may accept a VE’s opinion that contradicts the DOT definition only if the record contains “persuasive evidence to support the deviation” (citation omitted)
• noting 1 | that, at step four, the best source of information for how past relevant work is 2 || generally performed is vocational evidence such as the DOT, which may be 3 || rebutted by a vocational expert
• the ALJ may look to a claimant’s written statements and testimony in determining the demands of the claimant’s past work
• the court “cannot affirm the decision of an agency on a 28 1 Plaintiff could perform (A.R. 106

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).