Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Khan v. Astrue

November 23, 2010

SHEERAZ B. KHAN, PLAINTIFF,
v.
MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, DEFENDANT.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: VICTOR B. Kenton United States Magistrate Judge

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

(Social Security Case)

This matter is before the Court for review of the decision by the Commissioner of Social Security denying Plaintiff's application for disability benefits. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §636(c), the parties have consented that the case may be handled by the Magistrate Judge. The action arises under 42 U.S.C. §405(g), which authorizes the Court to enter judgment upon the pleadings and transcript of the Administrative Record ("AR") before the Commissioner. The parties have filed the Joint Stipulation ("JS"), and the Commissioner has filed the certified AR.

Plaintiff raises the following issues:

1. Whether the Administrative Law Judge ("ALJ") properly determined that Plaintiff could perform alternative work activity.

This Memorandum Opinion will constitute the Court's findings of fact and conclusions of law. After reviewing the matter, the Court concludes that for the reasons set forth, the decision of the Commissioner must be reversed.

I.

THE ALJ ERRED AT STEP FIVE OF THE SEQUENTIAL EVALUATION PROCESS BY FAILING TO INQUIRE INTO DEVIATIONS BETWEEN THE VOCATIONAL EXPERT'S TESTIMONY AND THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE DICTIONARY OF OCCUPATIONAL TITLES

In his decision, the ALJ determined that Plaintiff has the following residual functional capacity: lift and carry 20 pounds occasionally and 10 pounds frequently, stand/walk one-half hour at a time for a total of four hours in an eight-hour workday secondary to mild anemia, sit six hours in an eight-hour workday and occasional kneel, crouch and crawl. (AR 25.)

At the hearing which the ALJ conducted on July 24, 2007 (AR 36-49), a Vocational Expert ("VE") testified. The hypothetical included exertional limitations which were identical to the residual functional capacity ("RFC") as found in the ALJ's decision. (See AR at 45-46.)*fn1

After posing the aforesaid hypothetical, the VE was asked what work such an individual could do, in the absence of any past relevant work, and the following testimony ensued:

"Q: Okay.

A: And no prior training or experience required. And since we have a person who is limited to a sit/stand option, I will give you some examples of jobs, and the jobs have been eroded by approximately 59 percent for the sit/stand accommodation. For example, there's various types of bench packaging work such as a handkerchief folder, 920.687-098. This is light work, SVP 2. And on an eroded basis I would estimate about 7,000 jobs in the local economy and in the nation, in excess of 100,000 jobs. There's various types in inspecting work, such as inspector, 727.687-062. This is also light work, SVP 2, and again on an eroded basis, about 3,000 jobs in the local economy and about 70,000 jobs in the nation. There will be various types of assembly ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.