James P. v. Frank Bisignano

Summary

The United States District Court for the District of Minnesota remanded a Social Security disability benefits case for further administrative proceedings. The court held that the Administrative Law Judge failed to resolve an apparent conflict between vocational-expert testimony and the Dictionary of Occupational Titles under Social Security Ruling 00-4p. The court also found it unclear whether the Appeals Council considered a new vocational report submitted by the plaintiff.

Holdings

1. The ALJ erred by failing to inquire on the record about, obtain a reasonable explanation for, and resolve the conflict between the vocational expert's testimony that school-bus-driver work required only frequent reaching and handling and the Dictionary of Occupational Titles' description of that work as requiring constant reaching and handling.
2. The Appeals Council was required to review the Starr Report because it was new, material, related to the period on or before the ALJ's decision, and presented a reasonable probability of changing the outcome; remand was required because the court could not determine whether the Appeals Council had considered the report.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the ALJ violated Social Security Ruling 00-4p by relying on vocational-expert testimony without inquiring into and resolving the apparent conflict between that testimony and the Dictionary of Occupational Titles.
2. Whether the Appeals Council was required to review the new and material Starr vocational report and whether remand was required because the record did not establish that the Appeals Council considered it.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded