Lindberg

MEMORANDUM ***

Claimant Jill Lindberg challenges the denial of her application for disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income. We affirm.

A. The ALJ erred in his assessment of Lindberg’s “past relevant work” at step four, but went on to step five as an alternative basis for decision.

At step four, the ALJ in this case found that Lindberg was able to perform “past relevant work,” specifically as a cashier or real estate assistant. The district court correctly held that those jobs *698 did not generate enough income to qualify as past relevant work. But, because the ALJ continued to step five as an alternative basis for decision, the error at step four does not require reversal.

B. The treating physician’s testimony does not require a finding of disability.

We assume that the ALJ improperly discounted the testimony of Lind-berg’s treating physician, Dr. Olson. Even if Dr. Olson’s opinion is considered in determining Lindberg’s impairment, substantial evidence supports the conclusion that Lindberg is not disabled. Dr. Olson determined only that Lindberg should be excused from a job training program for two months — well below the statutory 12-month durational…