United States Second Circuit

The district court's judgment, affirming the Administrative Law Judge's (ALJ) denial of plaintiff's application for disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income, is affirmed, where: 1) the ALJ erred in relying on the vocational expert's testimony to conclude that there were significant numbers of jobs in the national economy that plaintiff could perform, because the ALJ failed to explicitly include plaintiff's non‐exertional (i.e., non‐physical) limitations in his "residual functional capacity" finding, and thus posed an incomplete hypothetical question to the vocational expert; but 2) the error was harmless because the hypothetical question posed to the vocational expert implicitly (and sufficiently) accounted for plaintiff's particular non‐exertional limitations; and therefore, 3) the ALJ's finding of no disability is supported by substantial evidence.

Appellate Information

• Decided 07/07/2014
• Published 07/07/2014

Judges

• JACOBS

Court

• United States Second Circuit

Counsel