4-199-007 (1998). DELLA B. GOMEZ.

• Case Date: September 21, 1998
• Court: Colorado

Colorado Workers Compensation 1998. 4-199-007 (1998). DELLA B. GOMEZ INDUSTRIAL CLAIM APPEALS OFFICEIN THE MATTER OF THE CLAIM OF DELLA B. GOMEZ, Claimant, v. MEI REGIS, Employer, and CNA INSURANCE COMPANY Insurer, Respondents.W. C. No. 4-199-007FINAL ORDER The claimant seeks review of the final order of Administrative Law Judge Rumler (ALJ), which denied her claim for permanent total disability benefits. The claimant contends the ALJ failed to make adequate findings of fact concerning her restrictions, her preexisting asthma problem, and her educational and cognitive deficits. The claimant also contends there is insufficient evidence that any employer would be willing to hire her. We affirm. The ALJ found that the claimant, while manager of a hair salon, sustained a compensable injury to her right shoulder and right upper extremity on September 14, 1991. The claimant now has pain and muscle spasms in her neck and right shoulder, as well as numbness and pain in her forearm. The ALJ found that the treating physician, Dr. Birney, imposed permanent restrictions which preclude the claimant from lifting more than ten pounds on a regular basis and twenty pounds occasionally. Further, the claimant may not perform repetitive tasks or overhead motions with the right upper extremity. The ALJ also found that the restrictions imposed by Dr. Birney are consistent with those imposed by Dr. Entin and Dr. Harder. (Findings of Fact 8, 9, 10). The ALJ credited the respondents' vocational expert, Mr. Montoya, who testified that the claimant can perform several jobs despite these restrictions, and despite restrictions stemming from her preexisting asthma. These jobs include crossing guard, parking lot attendant, small products assembler, and bench assembler. Under these circumstances, the ALJ concluded that the claimant is capable of earning wages in several forms of employment. Consequently, the ALJ denied the claim for permanent total disability benefits. I. On review, the claimant contends the ALJ made inadequate findings of fact concerning the claimant's restrictions, and the impact of those restrictions on the claimant's ability to perform work. The claimant also argues that the ALJ failed to consider the effects of the claimant's preexisting asthma, or the effects of her educational and cognitive deficits. We are not persuaded. ...