FOREMAN
v.
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
In a Social Security disability benefits case, the District Court granted the Commissioner's unopposed motion to remand the matter for further administrative proceedings. The court ordered entry of judgment for the plaintiff and directed the Appeals Council to instruct the Administrative Law Judge to obtain supplemental vocational expert evidence and resolve conflicts with the Dictionary of Occupational Titles before issuing a new decision.
The court granted the Commissioner's unopposed motion for remand with entry of judgment in favor of the plaintiff. Upon remand, the Appeals Council must instruct the Administrative Law Judge to obtain supplemental vocational expert evidence, identify and resolve any conflicts between the vocational expert's evidence and the Dictionary of Occupational Titles, provide the plaintiff an opportunity for a hearing, and issue a new decision.
[1] A court may enter judgment affirming, modifying, or reversing a Social Security Commissioner's decision, with or without remanding the cause for a rehearing.
[2] An unopposed motion to remand a Social Security case for further action under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. …
Previewing 2 of 5 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“the Social Security Administration's Appeals Council will instruct the Administrative Law Judge to seek supplemental vocational expert evidence to determine whether there are a significant number of jobs in the national economy that Plaintiff can perform”
Establishes the primary directive for the remand—obtaining supplemental vocational expert evidence regarding job availability
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe plaintiff sought Social Security disability benefits. The Commissioner, through counsel, moved to remand the case for further action by the Social…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
The Commissioner of Social Security (Commissioner) moves to remand this case for further action under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). (Doc. 22). This request is unopposed. (Id. at p. 2).
The Commissioner requests remand with entry of judgment for these reasons:
Upon remand, the Social Security Administration's Appeals Council will instruct the Administrative Law Judge to seek supplemental vocational expert evidence to determine whether there are a significant number of jobs in the national economy that Plaintiff can perform; before relying on the vocational expert evidence, identify and resolve any conflicts between the occupational evidence provided by the vocational expert and information in the Dictionary of Occupational Titles (DOT) (Social Security Ruling 00-4p (2000)); give Plaintiff an opportunity for a hearing; and issue a new decision. (Id. at p. 1). Section 405(g) of the Social Security Act provides "[t]he 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], with or without remanding the cause for a rehearing." See Shalala v. Schaefer, 509 U.S. 292 (1993).
Accordingly, the Commissioner's unopposed motion for entry of judgment with remand (Doc. 22) is GRANTED. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to enter judgment in favor of the plaintiff and close the file.
ENTERED in Tampa, Florida on May 16, 2024.
Amanda Arnold Samone AMANDA ARNOLD SANSONE United States Magistrate Judge