FIL ED U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S EL EVENTHCI RCUI T APR 25, 2011 J OHN L EY CL ERK [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE U

NITED STATE S COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELE VENTH CIRCUIT

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ No. 1 0- 12 68 0 Non -Arg um en t Ca le nd ar

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ D.C. Dock etNo. 0 :0 9- cv -6 09 30 -WPD JEANETTE HURTAD O, Pl ai nt iff - App el lant , ve rs us COMM ISSI ONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defen da nt- App el le e.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

th e Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co urt forth e So ut he rnDis tri ctof F lo rid a

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ (Ap ril 25 , 20 11 ) Befo re EDMONDSON, ANDERSON andBLACK, Cir cu itJu dg es . PER CURI AM:Je an ette Hurt ad o app eal s the di st ric t co urt’s o rd er af firm in g t he So ci al Secu rit y Co m m is si on er’s d en ia l o f Hurta do ’s app li cat io n fo r di sabi li ty ins ur an ce be ne fit s. No rev ers ib le erro r ha s b eensh own ; we af firm . Ourrev ie w of the Co m

m is si on er’s d eci si on is li m it edto whet he r subs tant ia l ev id en ce s up po rts th e d eci si on an d wh ethe r th e co rrec t l eg al st an dard s wer e ap pl ie d. Wils on v. Ba rn ha rt, 2 84 F.3d12 19 , 12 21 (11 th Cir . 20 02 ). “ Subs tant ia l ev id en ce i s m or e th ana sc in ti ll a an d i s s uc h re le va ntev id en ce as a reas on ab le pe rs on wou ldacce ptas a de qu at e to supp ort a c on cl us io n.” Crawfo rdv. Co m m ’r of So c. Sec., 3 63 F.3d11 55 , 11 58 (11 th Cir . 20 04 ). Und er thi s l im it edst an da rdof rev ie w, we m ay

no t m ak e fac t-f

in di ng s, re -wei gh th e ev id en ce, o r subs ti tu te ou r jud gm en t fo r th atof the Adm in is tra ti ve Law Ju dg e (“ ALJ”) . Moo re v . Barn ha rt, 40 5 F .3d12 08 , 12 11 (11 th Cir . 20 05 ). A per so n wh o app li es forSo ci al Secu rit y di sabi li ty ben efi ts m

us t p ro ve th at sh e is di sabl ed . See 2 0 C .F.R. § 4 04 .15 12 . The So ci al Secu rit y Reg ul at io ns 1 ou tl in e a fi ve -s te p s eque nt ia l ev al ua ti on pro ces s fo r de te rm in in g wh ethe r a cl ai m an t i s d is ab le d. 2 0 C .F.R. § 4 04 .15 20 (a)( 4) . The ALJ m us t ev al ua te (1) Disability

is the “inability

to eng ag e in any

substantial ga inful activity by rea son of any 1 medically deter minable phy sical or menta l impairment which ca n be expected to r esult in death or which ha s lasted or c an be e x pecte d to last for a c ontinuous period of not less than 12 months.” 42 U.S.C. § 423(d)(1)( A). 2whe th er the cla im an t en ga ge d i n s ub st an ti al ga in fu l wo rk ; (2 ) whe th er the

cl ai m an t h as a se ve re i m

pa irment; (3) whet he r th e se ve re i m pa irment m eet s o r equa ls anim

pa irment i n the Lis ti ng s o f Im pa irments ; (4 ) whe th er the cla im an t h as th e res idua l fu nc ti on al cap aci ty (“ RFC” ) to pe rfo rm he r pa strel ev an t wo rk ; an d (5 ) whe th er, i n the li gh t o f th e cl ai m an t’s RF C, ag e, educ at io n, an d wo rk ex pe rie nc e, th ere are o th er job s the cla im an t ca n p erfo rm . Id. Here, the ALJ co nc lu de d tha t Hu rta do ha d s ev ere i m pa irments of b ip ol ar di so rd er, m ajorde pr es si ve di so rd er, o bs es si ve co m pu ls iv e d is or de r, an d os te oa rth rit is of t he hi ps an d l um ba r sp in e. At s te p fo ur , th e ALJ co nc lu de d t ha t Hurta do lac ke d the RFC t o d o h er p as t re le va ntworkas a n e le m en tary sch oo l te ach er. Rel y in g o n the tes ti m on y of avo cat io na l ex pe rt ( “ VE”), th e ALJ co nc lu de d tha t o th er wo rk was a va il ab le insi gn ifi can t num be rs inth e n at io na l an d lo cal eco no m ie s tha t Hu rta do co ul d p erfo rm an d d et erm in edth atHurt ad o was no t di sabl ed . The VE op in edth atHurt ad o c ou ldpe rfo rm job s s uc h a s fa stfoo d worke r an d m ai l cl erk . Thes e job s i nv ol ve d re as on in g l ev el s o f 2 a nd3 res pe ct iv el y

un de r th e Dic ti on ary of

Occupa ti on al Tit le s (“ DOT”). On ap pe al , Hurt ad o a rg ue s tha t a c on fli ctex is te d b etweenth e VE’ s te st im on y an d the DOT becaus e th e rea so ni ng lev el s o f th e job s i de nt ifi edby the VE were in co ns is te ntwith h er RF C, whi chli m it edhe r to “ si m pl e, ro ut in e ta sk s 3with l im it edco nt actwith the publ ic .” Bec au se of t hi s u nr es ol ve d c on fli ct , Hurt ad o

co nt en ds , th e VE tes ti m on y di d n otco ns ti tu te subs tant ia l ev id en ce o n wh ic h t he ALJ co ul d b as e th e d et erm in at io n t ha t s he was n otdi sabl ed . At the fif th st ep of t he seque nt ia l p ro ces s, an ALJ m ay rel y so le ly on the te st im on y of aVE in d et erm in in g wh ethe r work i s av ai labl e in si gn ifi can t num be rs in th e n at io na l ec on omy

th ata cl ai m an t i s ab le to pe rfo rm . Jo ne s v . Apfe l, 1 90 F.3 d 1 22 4, 1 23 0 (1 1t h C ir. 1 99 9) . For t he tes ti m on y to co ns ti tu te subs tant ia l ev id en ce, “ th e ALJ m

us t p os e a h y

po th et ic al qu es ti on whi chco m pr is es all of t he cl ai m an t’s i m

pa irments .” Id . at 1 22 9. W e d is cern no ap pa ren t co nf li ctbe twee n t he VE’ s t es ti m on y an d t he DOT pr ov is io ns at i ss ue . Hurt ad o a rg ue s tha t the reas on in g l ev el s fo r a fas t fo od worke r an d am ai l cl erkare i nc on si st en t wi th th e ALJ’s h y po th et ic al li m it in g h er to on ly sim

pl e ro ut in e work. Bu t, wh il e Hurta do all eg ed ly suf fers fro m m em ory 2 an d c on cen tra ti on pro bl em s, s he ha s the ab il ity to reas on . Hurt ad o wo rk edfor17 y ears as atea ch er, s he ha d am as te r’s de gr ee, an d, a r ecen t ev al ua ti on co nc lu de d th atHurt ad o h ad“ in ta ctan d fa irl y well org an iz edth ou gh t p ro ces se s,” a s wel l as

“ av erag e to hi ghav erag e co gn it iv e ab il ity .” The d oc to r who co m pl et edHurt ad o’s

That the ALJ ’s hy

pothetical question to the VE c omprised all of he r impairments and 2 limit ations is undisput ed. 4m en ta l re si du al fun ct io na l capa ci ty ass es sm en t co nc lu de d t ha t s he ret ai ne d

“ ad equa te m en ta l ab il ity

to carry ou t s im pl e in st r[u ct io ns ] an d t o re la te ad equa te ly to othe rs ina ro ut in e work s et ti ng .” Giv enth e ALJ’s h y

po th et ic al th atHurt ad o c ou ldpe rfo rm on ly sim pl e ro ut in e work, the VE bel ie ve d tha t Hu rta do co ul d p erfo rm th e fas t fo odwork er o r m ai l cl erkjob s. At h er h eari ng , Hurt ad o d idno t o bjec t t o t he VE’ s t es ti m on y or qu al ifi cat io ns , off

er an y ev id en ce co nt ro ve rti ng th e VE’ s t es ti m on y , or e ve n qu es ti on th e VE. Andth e VE is anex pe rt o n t he ki nd s o f job s a p ers on can pe rfo rm , whi le th e DOT si m pl y pro vi de s g en eral iz edov erv ie ws o f job s an d n ot th e sp eci fic requi rem en ts of ajob . See SS R 0 0- 4p ; Ph il li ps v. Ba rn ha rt, 3 57 F.3d 12 32 , 12 40 (11 th Cir . 20 04 ); s ee al so Jo ne s, 1 90 F.3dat 1 23 0 (e xp la in in g tha t

“ [t]he DOT its el f st at es th atitis no t co m pr eh en si ve ” an d “ th e [So ci al Secu rit y Adm in is tra ti on ] it se lf d oe s n otco ns id er the DOT dis po si ti ve ”). So , th e VE id en ti fie d n o jo bs th atwentbe y on d Hu rta do ’s RFC, ev enun de r th e d efi ni ti on s i n th e DOT; an d the ALJ d idno t err in rel y in g o n t he VE’ s t es ti m on y . 3 Eve n a ss um in g tha t an in co ns is te nc y ex is te d b etweenth e VE’ s t es ti m on y an d the DOT, the ALJ d idno t err by relying onth e VE’ s t es ti m on y be cau se it Hurtado a

rgues that the VE did not conside r the “ limit ed public conta ct” r estriction in 3 her RF C. But the VE spe cifica lly considere d this li mitation before c oncludingthat she could work a s a fa st food worke r or mail cle rk. 5“ tru m

p[ ed ]” any

in co ns is te ntpro vi si on s o f th e DOT. Id. at12 29 -3 0 (e xp la in in g th at , if the re i s a c on fli ctbe twee n t he DOT andth e job s i de nt ifi edby a VEin res po ns e to th e h y

po th et ic al qu es ti on , th e te st im on y of t he VE “ tru m

ps ” th e DOT be cau se “ th e DOT is no t the so le so ur ce o f adm is si bl e in fo rm at io n c on cern in g job s” ). (qu ot at io n o m it te d) . The ALJ co m

m it te d n o e rro r in rel y in g upo n t he VE’ s t es ti m on y ; an d t hi s te st im on y co ns ti tu te d s ub st an ti al ev id en ce s up po rti ng th e ALJ’s co nc lu si on th at Hurta do co ul d p erfo rm

a si gn ifi can t num

be r of ex is ti ng job s i n t he na ti on al eco no m y . AFFIRMED.

6