Bridget Hunter v. Michael J. Astrue, No. 5:2010cv01563 - Document 19 (C.D. Cal. 2011)

Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER by Magistrate Judge Ralph Zarefsky. (ib)

Download PDF
O 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 BRIDGET HUNTER, 12 13 14 15 16 Plaintiff, vs. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CASE NO. ED CV 10-01563 RZ MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER 17 Plaintiff Bridget Hunter makes a single argument in support of her Complaint 18 that the Social Security Commissioner wrongly denied her claim for disability benefits. 19 She contends that the Administrative Law Judge ( ALJ ) improperly determined that 20 Plaintiff s prior work experience qualified as past relevant work. For the following 21 reasons, the Court affirms the Commissioner s decision. 22 A claimant s former occupation qualifies as past relevant work if it was 23 performed in the last fifteen years, for a long enough time to allow her to learn how to do 24 it, and produced enough income to qualify as substantial gainful activity. 20 C.F.R. 25 §§ 404.1560(b)(1), 416.960(b)(1). The Commissioner has established monthly earnings 26 thresholds for substantial gainful activity that vary by year. For the years applicable to the 27 Court s analysis, the monthly earnings thresholds are as follows: $500 for 1990 to June 28 1999; and $780 for July 1999 to 2000. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1574(b), 416.974(b). 1 In this case, the ALJ properly determined that Plaintiff's work as a certified 2 nurse s assistant qualified as past relevant work. In her Disability Report, Plaintiff wrote 3 that she was a patient support associate at a hospital from 1991 through 2000. She 4 explained that her responsibilities at this job included housekeeping, [taking] discharged 5 patients to their vehicles, [taking] dead patients to the morgue, answer[ing] phones, [and 6 taking] patients to [the] lab for exams or . . . treatment. (AR 163.) Her earnings exceeded 7 the threshold for substantial gainful activity every year from 1991 through 2000 (see AR 8 163), and Plaintiff does not contest that she spent enough time performing this job to allow 9 her to learn how to do it. The vocational expert testified that this job constituted past 10 relevant work as generally described by DICTIONARY OF OCCUPATIONAL TITLES section 11 355.677-014. (AR 45-46.) The DICTIONARY OF OCCUPATIONAL TITLES describes this 12 occupation as a Transporter, Patients or Escort, Patients, but the ALJ referred to it as 13 a hospital certified nurse s assistant. Because Plaintiff performed this job within the last 14 fifteen years, for a long enough time to learn how to do it, and earned enough income from 15 it to qualify as substantial gainful activity, the ALJ properly determined that Plaintiff s 16 experience in this occupation constituted past relevant work.1 In accordance with the foregoing, the decision of the Commissioner is 17 18 affirmed. 19 DATED: October 27, 2011 20 21 22 RALPH ZAREFSKY UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 Because the ALJ properly determined that Plaintiff s experience as a certified nurse s assistant qualified as past relevant work, the Court need not and does not address whether the ALJ erred in determining that Plaintiff s experience as a child care monitor and home attendant also qualified as past relevant work. -2-

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.