Opinion
Civil No. 4:13-CV-78-FHM
2013-09-30
OPINION AND ORDER
The court hereby grants Defendant's Unopposed Motion for Voluntary Remand Pursuant to Sentence Four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) (#17). Accordingly, the court hereby reverses the final decision of the Commissioner and remands the case to the Commissioner for further proceedings. Under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), a federal district court has the power "to enter, upon the pleadings and transcript of the record, a judgment affirming, modifying or reversing the decision of the Commissioner . . ., with or without remanding the cause for a rehearing." See Shalala v. Schaefer, 509 U.S. 292, 296-97 (1993); Melkonyan v. Sullivan, 501 U.S. 89, 97-98 (1991).
Remand of this case is necessary because the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) deviated from Tenth Circuit caselaw by finding Plaintiff not disabled at step five, relying on the Medical-Vocational Rules, without first explicitly addressing the agency's borderline-age regulation. Upon remand, the ALJ will afford Plaintiff the opportunity for a de novo hearing and render a new decision in accordance with the applicable caselaw and regulations. The ALJ will, if needed, obtain additional evidence from a vocational expert regarding the existence of jobs in significant numbers in the national economy that Plaintiff can perform.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 30thday of September, 2013.
____________________
FRANK H. McCARTHY
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE