Opinion
5:23-cv-360-MTT-CHW
02-22-2024
D.H., Plaintiff, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant.
Social Security Appeal
ORDER
MARC T. TREADWELL, CHIEF JUDGE
The Commissioner of Social Security has moved, under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g),for entry of judgment to remand the case for further administrative action. (Doc. 11). In light of that request, which Plaintiff does not oppose, the Court hereby GRANTS the motion and REVERSES and REMANDS the Commissioner's decision under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). See Shalala v. Schafer, 509 U.S. 292 (1993); Melkonyan v. Sullivan, 501 U.S. 89 (1991). On remand, the Commissioner, through the ALJ, will (1) obtain supplemental vocational evidence addressing and resolving inconsistences between the limitations assessed in the residual function capacity and the jobs Plaintiff can perform in the national economy as noted in Social Security Ruling 004p; (2) take any further action needed to update or develop the administrative record; (3) offer Plaintiff the opportunity for a hearing; and (4) issue a new decision.
Sentence four of § 405(g) provides: “The court shall have power to enter, upon the pleadings, and transcript of the record, a judgment affirming, modifying, or reversing the decision of the Commissioner of Social Security, with our without remanding the cause for a rehearing.” 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).
The Clerk of Court will enter a separate judgment pursuant to Rule 58 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
In his original motion to remand, the Commissioner attached a proposed order that concerned a different claimant and motion. (Doc. 11-2). To correct this error, the Commissioner has moved to strike the incorrect proposed order and replace it with a corrected one. (Doc. 12). Although the Court is not using the Commissioner's proposed order, the motion to strike (Doc. 12) is GRANTED for purposes of the record.
SO ORDERED.