Boggs

MEMORANDUM **

Jacquelyn Boggs appeals the district court’s decision affirming the Commissioner of Social Security’s denial of her application for disability insurance benefits on *584 the basis that she retains the capacity to perform work that exists in substantial numbers in the national economy. As the parties are familiar with the underlying facts, they will not be repeated here.

Boggs argues that the Administrative Law Judge’s (“ALJ”) finding that she can work as an office helper or a mail sorter is inconsistent with the Vocational Expert’s (“VE”) testimony. The VE referenced both of these positions; however, during the course of her testimony, the VE eliminated such positions based on the limitations ultimately adopted by the ALJ.

The ALJ found that Boggs is limited to “dealing with things rather than people.” He further indicated that the VE should eliminate all jobs that involve telephone interactions. The VE’s description of the office' helper position clearly indicates that it involves working with people. The VE also explained that an office helper “might have to fill in at the phone.” Similarly, the VE stated that a person limited only to occasional bending and…