Opinion ID: 2978627
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: ALJ hearings

Text: An ALJ hearing was scheduled for August 24, 2004, which was continued in order for Cunningham to obtain further medical evidence. A second hearing occurred on October 5, 2004, at which Cunningham testified that he had trouble maintaining his blood glucose level; suffered from exhaustion, which required him to take a nap every afternoon; had trouble sitting and standing for more than a couple hours at a time due to his diabetes; had a difficult time maintaining his balance; could cook, load a dishwasher, wash dishes, run a vacuum cleaner, sweep a floor, make a bed, write, and read with his glasses; had limited feeling in his hands and fingers, such that he could not pick a penny up off of a table; and suffered from diarrhea due to his 1 Cunningham also filed applications on August 23, 1999, and October 26, 2000, which were denied initially and on reconsideration; and May 6, 2002, which was escalated and included in the ALJ’s July 8, 2005 decision. -4- No. 08-3848 Cunningham v. Comm’r of Social Security transplant medications. This hearing was also continued. A third hearing took place on April 12, 2005, at which both Cunningham and Vocational Expert (“VE”) Mark Anderson testified.2 The ALJ posed the following relevant hypothetical to the VE to determine if Cunningham could perform substantial activity in the national economy. It posited an individual Same age, education, vocational background of the claimant here before us today. Limited to lifting . . . [five] pounds frequently, up to [ten] pounds occasionally. . . . [He]can sit for six hours out of an eight-hour workday, stand and walk for two hours out of an eight-hour workday. No unprotected heights, no ropes, ladders, scaffolds. Occasional – and I should put it very occasionally – ramps and stairs. No uneven surfaces. No temperature extremes, no balancing requirements, occasional stooping. Going to preclude him from working with small parts – that’s because of a partial amputation of the great finger, this thumb on his left hand – oh, on his right hand. . . . And he has a minor loss of visual acuity, which would probably go with the small parts in a different way than the thumb. So linking those two together – no close visual acuity. . . . (Tr. at 59.) The VE testified that the hypothetical individual could only perform jobs at the sedentary level,3 which would include the jobs of document preparer and security camera monitor. The VE noted that he “excluded jobs that would require constant near acuity or constant – for over 2/3 of a day spent doing jobs that required near acuity.” (Id. at 61.) And the VE stated that his findings are consistent with requiring a sit/stand option; did not require rapid, repetitive use of the hands or arms; and did not require kneeling, crawling, stooping, interaction with fumes or dust, and only occasional crouching. 2 It should be noted that at this hearing Cunningham’s counsel arrived 20 minutes late and asked the ALJ, at the end of the hearing, “Can I just submit a – something in writing, please? I just – I am having a real hard time functioning, right now.” (Tr. at 54, 74.) 3 “Sedentary work involves lifting no more than 10 pounds at a time and occasionally lifting or carrying articles like docket files, ledgers, and small tools. Although a sedentary job is defined as one which involves sitting, a certain amount of walking and standing is often necessary in carrying out job duties.” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1567(a). -5- No. 08-3848 Cunningham v. Comm’r of Social Security With regards to Cunningham’s need for afternoon naps, the VE stated: These jobs all contemplate that an individual in any given hour is going to be on task – or put another way, will not be off task more than five or seven minutes. If an individual for whatever reason in taking a nap is fatigued, is not able to sustain themselves or they need to rest or be off task more than five or seven minutes, th[e]n they’re generally not going to be employable on the kind of jobs that I talked about or any jobs for that matter. . . . If anything took him off task more than seven minutes in any given hour and that continued, then they would not be employable. (Id. at 70-71.) The VE testified that these two jobs existed in substantial numbers in the economy: (1) document preparer – 250,000 jobs nationally; 25,000 jobs in Ohio; 4,000 jobs locally; (2) security camera monitor – 125,000 jobs nationally; 5,000 jobs in Ohio; 1,200 jobs locally.