Taylor v. Astrue

Filing 15

ORDER granting 13 Motion to Remand to SSA. The clerk will enter a separate judgment. Signed by David A. Sanders on 5/25/10. (ncb, USDC)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI EASTERN DIVISION BETTY JEAN TAYLOR, Plaintiff, vs. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case No. 1:09-CV-283-DAS

ORDER OF REVERSAL AND REMAND On unopposed motion of Michael J. Astrue, Commissioner of the Social Security Administration, Defendant in the above cause and 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), this court hereby reverses the Commissioner's decision and remands Plaintiff's claim for further development of the record and the issuance of a new decision. The ALJ's step five finding was based on a hypothetical question that did not match Plaintiff's residual functional capacity. The Plaintiff's residual functional capacity permitted

her to stand for 15 minutes, but the ALJ found the Plaintiff could perform other work based on a hypothetical that permitted her to stand for twenty minutes (Tr. 13, 16, 40-42). The

Plaintiff's case must be remanded because the ALJ's hypothetical

question must exactly match his residual functional capacity finding. See, for example, Masterson v. Barnhart, 309 F.3d 267, See also 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(f);

273 (5th Cir. 2002). 416.920(f) (2009).

On remand, the Appeals Council must remand the case to an ALJ. The ALJ will reassess the Plaintiff's ability to work based

upon an accurate hypothetical. The Clerk of the Court will enter a separate judgment pursuant to Rule 58 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. SO ORDERED this the 25th day of May, 2010.

/s/ David A. Sanders UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

2