the us patent act

the us patent act
The problem: I have many social security disability hearings, but Mr. Smith's case, some special problems because of his prior training and work experience.

Education: Mr. Smith has a degree and diploma. He was much better educated than the usual client.

Previous Job Experience: He worked 31 years as an accountant. His previous work was not only a sedentary (sit-down-) job, but also a job that Mr. Smith many transferable skills.

Smith's back surgeon in his opinion Smith's previous surgeon had done back merger Mr Smith. The post-surgery MRI indicated Mr. Smith's merger was progressing, so that the surgeon has no structural reasons why Mr Smith was still excruciating pain.

The Doctor of Social Security Opinion: This doctor examined Smith time and concluded Smith was, by its operation and not be disabled for the requisite twelve months, which is needed by Social Security.

His Age: Mr. Smith was 57 years old. This was a good age at which Social Security, but Smith, education and work experience seemed to agree on Smith's low age.

My strategy: Mr. Smith says he was in unbearable pain in spite of the apparently successful surgery. He said the operation had his pain worse. I needed to create a favorable assessment of the surgeon, despite his earlier opinion. Once we have succeeded in this evaluation, we also have an evaluation of Smith family doctor for a finding of disability. Social Security does not accept a doctor statement that "disabled." "But Social Security is the opinion of doctors on the common activities such as standing, walking, lifting, sitting, concentration, etc., are adopted by an impairment such as back pain. So we get the reviews shows Mr. Smith's residual capacity to do , the above-mentioned activities was severely restricted. At the hearing before the conference, I went through these reviews with Mr. Smith and his adult daughter. We wanted to ensure that there is no disagreement between Mr. Smith, his doctors, his daughter , and Mr. Smith's own statements, to social security.

The hearing on the date before we judge. Mr. Smith and his daughter testify about his pain and how it limited his activity. The specialized experts testified Smith on working experience in the past. He testified also because of its limits of its capabilities are not transferable to other sedentary jobs.

Decision: Since we have shown Smith to be less than sedentary work, since he was 57 years old, and because the vocational expert found Smith to have no transferable skills, we won the case of his disability. Mr. Smith was overjoyed with the judge's decision.

The key to the victory: Smith and his daughter testified convincingly about its limitations at the hearing. Smith was 55 years old. We've done it to favorable ratings of Smith's surgeon and general practitioner. The specialized experts testified Smith had no transferable skills. So we overcame the problems created by Smith in the past background as a chartered accountant and his superior education.

Copyright © 2006, Jerry Lutkenhaus. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

This can be considered as advertising or advertising material under the rules of professional conduct of lawyers in Virginia. This notice is only for general information. The information in this note not to be too formal legal advice nor the formation of a lawyer / client relationship.

Jerry Lutkenhaus is a practitioner of Workers' Compensation and Social Security in the Richmond, Virginia, for more than 30 years he was with an "AV" rating from Martindale Hubbell in 2003. Lexis Nexis find him in the 2005 Bar Directory of the outstanding lawyers. More information can be found on our website http://www.geraldlutkenhaus.com & http://www.virginiadisabilitylawyer.com or call Jerry Lutkenhaus at 804-358-4766 for a free consultation about your claim.