United States Sixth Circuit

In an action for Social Security disability benefits, the denial of benefits is affirmed, where the ALJ's decision was supported by substantial evidence, because the fact that a vocational expert and the DOT might use different terminology to describe employment positions does not establish a conflict between these two sources of evidence.

Appellate Information

• Decided 03/31/2009
• Published 03/31/2009

Judges

• Before BOGGS, Chief Judge;  GILMAN and ROGERS, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Sixth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• ARGUED:  Mark R. Naegel, Sr., Cincinnati, Ohio, for Appellant.   Bill Thomas, Office of the Regional Chief Counsel, Social Security Administration, Chicago, Illinois, for Appellee.   ON BRIEF:  Mark R. Naegel, Sr., Cincinnati, Ohio, for Appellant.  Bill Thomas, Office of the Regional Chief Counsel, Social Security Administration, Chicago, Illinois, for Appellee.