Richard Norton v. Michael Astrue

Good Law
472 F. App'x 635
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 30, 201210-55878California438 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Richard L. Norton (“Norton”) appeals from a denial of disability insurance benefits under Title II and Title XVI of the Social Security Act. The Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) upheld the Commissioner of Social Security’s (“Commissioner”) finding that Norton was not disabled. A timely request for review was declined by the Appeals Council. We review that court’s judgment in favor of the Commissioner pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We affirm.

At Step Five of the Sequential Analysis, the ALJ found that Norton: (1) had not worked since his alleged disability onset date of January 1, 2005; (2) has severe impairments of seizure disorder and lower back pain; (3) Norton’s severe impairments do not meet or equal one of the Listed Impairments described in 20 C.F.R. Pt. 404, Subpt. P, App. 1; (4) retained the residual functional capacity to perform medium work and simple, repetitive tasks, but should not perform repetitive overhead motions and should not be exposed to haz ards; and, (5) work exists in significant numbers that Norton is capable of performing. In making the finding of residual functional capacity, the ALJ found that Norton’s statements regarding the intensity,…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.