Forth v. Social Security Administration

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO MARY FORTH, Plaintiff, vs. CIV 20-0831 KBM KILOLO KIJAKAZI, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant.

ORDER OF REMAND Defendant, the Commissioner of Social Security (Commissioner), by and through his counsel, has filed an unopposed motion with this Court, pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), to enter a judgment with an order of reversal with remand of the case for further administrative proceedings. Doc. 30. After reviewing Plaintiff’s case, the Commissioner submits that remand is warranted. Id. Plaintiff does not oppose the requested relief. Id. To remand under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), however, the Court must review the record and determine whether the ALJ’s decision is supported by substantial evidence, or whether the ALJ correctly applied the law relevant to the disability claim.

Nguyen v. Shalala, 43 F.3d 1400, 1403 (10th Cir. 1994). If not, reversal is appropriate. Id. Having reviewed the record in light of the issues Plaintiff raised in her Motion to Remand, the Court finds that the ALJ’s decision is not supported by substantial evidence and that the ALJ did not apply the correct legal standards in determining that Plaintiff is not disabled. Therefore, pursuant to the power of this Court to enter a judgment reversing the Commissioner's decision with remand under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), this Court hereby reverses the Commissioner's decision and remands this matter to the Commissioner. See Shalala v. Schaefer, 509 U.S. 292 (1993). Upon remand, the agency will reconsider Plaintiffs claim and specifically evaluate the opinion evidence of record, including the opinions from Dr. Bray-Morris, pursuant to the provisions of 20 C.F.R. 404.1527, and explain the weight given to such opinion evidence.

Dated this day of September, 2021.

Kam bem Loe UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE Proceeding by Consent