Manzo

MEMORANDUM ** *

Joseph Manzo appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of the Commissioner of Social Security in Manzo’s application seeking disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income benefits under Titles II and XVI of the Social Security Act, respectively. We reverse and remand.

(1) Manzo asserts that the Administrative Law Judge erred at the third step of the five step sequential evaluation process 1 when he determined that Manzo did not meet the listing for disorders of the spine. See 20 C.F.R., Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1,1.05C. We disagree. The ALJ thoroughly reviewed the evidence and made the necessary findings. See Lewis v. Apfel, 236 F.3d 503, 513-14 (9th Cir.2001). In order to meet the listing, Manzo had to satisfy all of its criteria. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.925 (d); Sullivan v. Zebley, 493 U.S. 521, 530 , 110 S.Ct. 885, 891 , 107 L.Ed.2d 967 (1990). We find that the ALJ’s decision that Manzo did not satisfy the criteria was supported by adequate evidence.

*754 (2) Manzo also asserts that the ALJ erred at the fifth step of the evaluation process because he did not present a complete hypothetical to the vocational expert. We…