CLARK v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY

Filing 16

ORDER granting 15 Motion to Remand under sentence four. Ordered by US MAGISTRATE JUDGE STEPHEN HYLES on 8/30/18. (AGH)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
ATHENS DIVISION
DOUGLAS CLARK,
Plaintiff,
v.
ACTING COMMISSIONER OF
SOCIAL SECURITY,
Defendant.

:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:

CASE NO. 3:18-cv-40-MSH

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 Defendant’s request and Plaintiff’s consent to remand, this case is hereby
remanded. Remand is appropriate in this case because the ALJ’s finding at step five is
not supported by substantial evidence because of an unresolved inconsistency between
the vocational expert’s testimony and the Dictionary of Occupational Titles. See I.N.S. v.
Ventura, 537 U.S. 12, 16 (2002).

On remand, the agency will update the medical

evidence, further consider Plaintiff’s RFC, further inquire of a vocational expert about the
existence of jobs in the national economy, and issue a new decision.
Accordingly, 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, this 30th day of August, 2018.
/s/ Stephen Hyles
UNTED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

2