Upload a complaint or brief to quickly find on-point case law.
CARA A.I. uses the facts and legal issues in your document to find relevant authorities.
Drag a complaint or brief hereUpload a complaint or briefPDF documentWORD documentTXT documentOr, choose a document to uploadChoose DocumentSecure
Find on-point cases faster with CARA A.I.
§

Ruby V. v. Saul

Case No. 8:19-cv-00871-JDE (C.D. Cal. May. 8, 2020)
Depth of Treatment
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newest
Cite Count
Ruby V. v. Saul

1 Citing case

  1. Kevin E. v. Saul

    Case No. 2:19-cv-09831-JC (C.D. Cal. Jan. 14, 2021)

    Plaintiff fails to show that the ALJ erred by not specifically addressing contentions regarding the job numbers based on these non-DOT sources. See Ruby V. v. Saul, 2020 WL 2307237, at *6 (C.D. Cal. May 8, 2020) (ALJ properly relied on vocational expert testimony and had no obligation to address asserted job number conflicts with non-DOT sources raised in post-hearing submissions), appeal docketed, No. 20-55586 (9th Cir. June 8, 2020). Instead, the ALJ reasonably relied on the vocational expert's testimony regarding job numbers at step five, which alone constitutes substantial evidence.