Troy J.B. v. Bisignano

Background

Troy J.B. applied for Supplemental Security Income on April 18, 2023. His application was denied initially and again on reconsideration. After a hearing on July 24, 2024, an administrative law judge decided that he was not disabled. The Appeals Council declined further review, making the administrative judge’s decision the final agency decision subject to court review.

The administrative judge found that Troy J.B. retained the capacity to perform light work, subject to several restrictions, including no more than occasional contact with supervisors, coworkers, and the general public throughout the workday. A vocational expert identified three jobs that a person with those restrictions could perform: housekeeper/cleaner, folder, and mail clerk. The expert later testified that a person unable to interact with coworkers and supervisors for at least two-thirds of the training period could not be trained for those jobs. All three jobs had a training classification called Specific Vocational Preparation, or SVP, level 2. That level covers training lasting from more than a short demonstration up to one month.

Troy J.B. argued that the vocational expert’s testimony was inconsistent. In his view, someone limited to occasional workplace interaction could not complete training that required more frequent interaction, so the administrative judge had not shown that he could perform any available job.

Court’s analysis

The court reviewed whether the administrative judge made a legal error and whether substantial evidence supported the decision. Substantial evidence means relevant evidence that a reasonable person could consider enough to support a conclusion.

The court found no legal error. It concluded that the administrative judge properly rejected the vocational expert’s opinion about the amount of interaction required during training. The Dictionary of Occupational Titles described SVP level 2 training as a range lasting from slightly more than a short demonstration to one month; it did not say that training required contact with coworkers or supervisors for at least two-thirds of the day. The three jobs also involved the lowest level of personal interaction recognized in that source, consisting of attending to a supervisor’s instructions or orders without an immediate response unless clarification was needed.

The court reasoned that a person’s residual functional capacity describes what the person can do on a regular and continuing basis, not necessarily what the person can do during a brief training period. It therefore held that limited regular contact with others does not automatically prevent someone from performing a job whose training may involve greater interaction for a short time. The court also noted that most courts addressing the issue had rejected the theory advanced by Troy J.B.

The court distinguished a decision cited by Troy J.B. because, in that earlier case, the administrative judge had failed to address an unresolved conflict in the vocational expert’s testimony. Here, the administrative judge addressed the conflict and chose the Dictionary of Occupational Titles’ description over the expert’s revised opinion.

Recommendation and notice

Judge Micko recommended that Troy J.B.’s request to reverse or send back the Commissioner’s decision be DENIED and that the Commissioner’s request to affirm the decision be GRANTED. The report further concluded that substantial evidence supported the finding that Troy J.B. could perform the three identified jobs within his restrictions.

The notice states that this Report and Recommendation is not an order or judgment and cannot be appealed directly to the Court of Appeals. A party may file specific written objections within 14 days after being served with the report, and a response may be filed within 14 days after service of the objections.