Beatriz v. Lounsburry v. Jo Anne B. Barnhart, Commissioner of Social Security

ORDER

The Opinion filed on September 20, 2006, is amended as follows: on slip opinion page 11744 [ 464 F.3d 944 (9th Cir. 2006)], lines 1-3, delete the following text:

An individual with both exertional and non-exertional limitations cannot, however, be found “nondisabled” based only on the grids.

OPINION

Beatriz V. Lounsburry (“Lounsburry”) appeals the district court’s judgment affirming the Commissioner of Social Security’s decision to deny her disability benefits under Title II of the Social Security Act. Lounsburry’s application for benefits was denied initially and on reconsideration, and Lounsburry requested a hearing before an administrative law judge (“ALJ”). The ALJ found that although Lounsburry had severe exertional and non-exertional impairments that precluded her performing her previous work, these impairments were not disabling because they did not preclude Lounsburry from performing a single occupation that existed in significant numbers in the economy. Lounsburry contends that the ALJ committed legal error because Rule 202.00(c) of the Medical-Vocational Guidelines, as applied to the ALJ’s uncontested findings of fact, directs as a matter of law a determination…