Haynes v. Commissioner of Social Security
FINAL JUDGMENT in favor of Vernon Haynes against Commissioner of Social Security. THE CASE IS REMANDED FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS. CASE CLOSED. Signed by Magistrate Judge Jane M. Virden on 10/23/17. (ncb)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY
This cause is before the court on Plaintiff’s complaint for judicial review of an
unfavorable final decision of the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration
denying a claim for a period of disability and disability insurance benefits and a claim for
supplemental security income. The parties have consented to entry of final judgment by the
United States Magistrate Judge under the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), with any appeal
to the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. The court, having reviewed the administrative
record, the briefs of the parties, and the applicable law, and having heard oral argument, finds
Consistent with the court’s ruling from the bench during a hearing held 10/19/17, the
court finds the ALJ’s step five determination is not supported by substantial evidence in the
record. Specifically, the ALJ’s step five determination is not supported by vocational expert
testimony. Indeed, the ALJ failed to present a hypothetical to the vocational expert that
contained all of the claimant’s limitations found by the ALJ. Among other components of
the claimant’s residual functional capacity (“RFC”), the ALJ found the claimant “should not
reach overhead or reach in all other directions more than occasionally using the left upper
extremity.” This finding was based in part upon subjective complaints the ALJ found to be
credible. Nevertheless, at step five of the sequential evaluation process, the ALJ determined
the claimant could perform the following jobs:
Parking Lot Attendant, DOT No. 915.473-010
Ticket Seller, DOT No. 211.467-030
Bench Assembler, DOT No. 706.684-042
The parking lot attendant and bench assembler jobs both require frequent reaching, however,
and the ticket seller job requires constant reaching. The conflict in this instance is obvious.
On remand, the ALJ will obtain supplemental vocational expert evidence on the issue
of whether there are other jobs the claimant can perform based upon the RFC and other
relevant vocational factors found in the ALJ’s July 13, 2015, decision. The ALJ may
conduct any additional proceedings not inconsistent with the court’s ruling.
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that this case is
REVERSED and REMANDED for further proceedings.
This, the 23rd day of October, 2017.
/s/ Jane M. Virden
U. S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?