Opinion ID: 627902
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Interrupting of Naranjo's Attorney

Text: 12 Naranjo complains that the ALJ improperly interrupted her attorney and prevented him from asking certain questions. Her lawyer was asking the vocational expert whether she could do any work, including light work, if she could lift no more than eight pounds, and the vocational expert started to respond 13 Vocational Expert: And to come back to answer your's, with this stipulation [that she could lift no more than eight pounds], she wouldn't even be able to do sedentary work because of the weight requirement. 14 ALJ: Counsel, only for the purpose of this hearing, if you're going to find her anything at light or below, she's going to be found disabled because of the grid, so why ask him? The grid controls with her age, with her, with her lack of educa--lack of work experience, if it's light or less, she's going to be disabled--and inability to speak English--so there's no point in giving him the hypotheticals that are anything within that category because you, you already have a basis for disability here in the grid regulations. 15 Atty: Well, I would certainly agree with you there, your honor. I have no further questions. 16 (emphasis added) 17 The ALJ was reminding Naranjo's lawyer that there was no point in talking about her eligibility for light work, because if she was not eligible for medium work or above, according to the grid, she would be disabled. Naranjo did not contest that proposition at the hearing, and she does not now. Given that she agrees it would be futile to inquire about eligibility for light work and her lawyer's statement that he had no more questions, Naranjo has no basis to complain that the ALJ improperly prevented her from developing a factual record. 18 AFFIRMED.