The number of on-the-record (“OTR”) approvals has decreased over the years, due in large part to the elimination of the treating physician rule allowance rate has correspondingly decreased. Nonetheless, when the vocational facts align with the medical evidence, an OTR should be sought.
We represent a 58 year old from Port Jefferson Station with sleep apnea, cardiovascular and orthopedic impairments that stopped him from working in law enforcement. During a hearing with an ALJ from Connecticut, a vocational witness (“VW”) testified that the claimant’s past work was light and had no transferable skills.
The claimant’s pulmonologists confirmed that Mr. Kline met the criteria of listing 3.02 A and B, based on an FVC of 1.68 and an FEV of 1.12. The claimant’s pulmonary function testing revealed “severe restriction/obstruction.”
After the case was transferred back to the Long Island hearing office, the physicians treating the claimant’s musculoskeletal impairments and obstructive sleep apnea concluded the claimant could not even perform sedentary work. Moreover, the VW had testified that leg elevation would preclude all work, and the claimant’s orthopedist stressed the importance for the claimant to elevate his legs.
In light of the above, we submitted a request for an OTR. Even if the claimant did not meet a listing, his less than sedentary work capacity would require finding him disabled. Furthermore, even if the claimant did not meet a listing, and did not have a less than sedentary work capacity, his need to elevate his legs would require finding him disabled. Additionally, even if the claimant did not meet a listing, and did not have a less than sedentary work capacity, and did not need to elevate his legs, and had light work capacity, then the medical-vocational rules would require finding him disabled. The ALJ approved canceled the hearing, and approved the OTR.
No comments:
Post a Comment