Chapman

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9

10 S.C., Case No. 19-cv-04349-NC 11 Plaintiff,

ORDER REMANDING CASE FOR

12 v. FURTHER PROCEEDINGS

13 ANDREW M. SAUL, 14 Defendant. 15

16 In this social security review, petitioner S.C. moves for this Court to remand his 17 case for payment of benefits while the Commissioner of Social Security moves to remand 18 the case for further proceedings. The question presented is narrow: both parties agree that, 19 at S.C.’s hearing before an Administrative Law Judge, the government’s Vocational Expert 20 provided incorrect testimony. The parties disagree as to the remedy. The Court FINDS 21 that further proceedings, rather than immediate payment of benefits, is necessary here 22 because the record has not been fully developed and there is a need to resolve ambiguities 23 by presentation of further evidence. 24 I. Background 25 Petitioner S.C. filed for disability benefits on April 15, 2016. AR 149. He alleged 26 disability beginning on October 22, 2013 based…