The opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MAINE
ERIC W. WHITE-BROWN, Civil No.: 2:22-cv-00316-GZS
Plaintiff,
v.
KILOLO KIJAKAZI,
Acting Commissioner of Social Security,
Defendant. March 13, 2023
ORDER
Pursuant to the power of this Court to enter a judgment affirming, modifying
or reversing the Commissioner’s decision with remand in Social Security actions
under sentence four of section 205(g) of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. § 405(g),
and in light of the government’s request to remand this action for further
administrative proceedings by the Appeals Council.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this case be remand to Social Security
Administration for further administrative proceedings. Upon the remand of this
case by the Court, the Appeals Council will remand the case to an administrative
law judge (ALJ) who will be directed to provide Plaintiff with the opportunity for a
new hearing and obtain additional evidence concerning Plaintiff’s impairments in
order to complete the administrative record (20 C.F.R. 404.1512), including, if
warranted and available, evidence from a medical expert related to the nature and
severity of and functional limitations resulting from Plaintiff’s impairments (20
C.F.R. § 404.1513a(b)(2)). Upon remand, the Appeals Council will also instruct the
ALJ to, if warranted, give further consideration to Plaintiff’s maximum residual
functional capacity with appropriate rationale and specific references to evidence of
record in support of the assessed limitations (20 C.F.R. § 404.1545 and Social
Security Ruling 96-8p). The Appeals Council will also instruct the ALJ to, if
warranted, obtain supplemental evidence from a vocational expert to clarify the
effect of the assessed limitations on Plaintiff’s occupational base and identify
examples of appropriate jobs and to state the incidence of such jobs in the national
economy (20 C.F.R. § 404.1566 and Social Security Ruling 83-14). In so doing, before
relying on the vocational expert evidence, the ALJ will be instructed to elicit a
reasonable explanation for any conflicts between the vocational expert evidence and
the Dictionary of Occupational Titles; and issue a new decision.
Therefore, this Court hereby reverses the Commissioner’s decision under
sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) with a remand of the cause to the Commissioner
for further proceedings. See Shalala v. Schaefer, 509 U.S. 292 (1993); Melkonyan v.
Sullivan, 501 U.S. 89 (1991). The clerk of the court will enter a separate judgment
pursuant to Rule 58 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
SO ORDERED.
/s/ George Z. Singal
United States District Judge
Dated this 13th day of March, 2023.