Opinion ID: 69373
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: hubbard’s past relevant work

Text: On appeal, Hubbard argues that the ALJ’s determination that his past relevant work was light in exertion was not supported by the record. Hubbard also argues that the ALJ erred because he analyzed how Hubbard’s past relevant work was generally performed in the economy instead of how that work was performed by Hubbard. We conduct a limited review of the ALJ’s decision “to determine if it is supported by substantial evidence and based on proper legal standards.” Crawford 2 v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 363 F.3d 1155, 1158 (11th Cir. 2004). “Substantial evidence is more than a scintilla and is such relevant evidence as a reasonable person would accept as adequate to support a conclusion.” Id. We must remand a case in which an ALJ makes an important factual finding that is not supported by substantial evidence in the record. Brady v. Heckler, 724 F.2d 914, 921 (11th Cir. 1984). A claimant seeking disability benefits bears the burden of proving that he cannot perform his past relevant work either as he performed it or as it is generally performed in the national economy. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1560(b), 404.1520(f). An ALJ may rely on information contained in the Dictionary of Occupational Titles (the “DOT”) to determine whether a claimant can perform his past relevant work as it is generally performed in the national economy. Social Security Ruling 82-61. A job is classified as light in exertion if it “involves lifting no more than 20 pounds at a time with frequent lifting or carrying of objects weighing up to 10 pounds.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1567(b). Jobs involving the lifting of 50 and 100 pounds are classified, respectively, as requiring medium and heavy exertion. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1567(c), (d). After reviewing Hubbard’s symptoms, the ALJ determined that Hubbard is capable of performing light work. The ALJ determined that Hubbard could 3 perform his past relevant work as it is generally performed in the national economy because sales and computer graphics are both light in exertion. Hubbard’s argument that his past relevant work in sales and computer graphics required lifting weight and walking distances that would categorize his past work as medium or heavy in exertion is unpersuasive. The ALJ is permitted to rely on the DOT classifications to determine whether Hubbard’s past relevant work is light in exertion as it is generally performed in the national economy. The ALJ reviewed Hubbard’s symptoms, and there is substantial evidence in the record to support the ALJ’s determination that Hubbard is capable of performing light work. Therefore, the ALJ did not err in relying on standard classifications for sales and computer graphics work in determining that Hubbard could perform his past relevant work as it is generally performed in the national economy.1