Case Name: Mary T. BROWN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Kenneth S. APFEL, Commissioner of Social Security, DefendantAppellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2001-10-19
Citations: 21 F. App'x 125
Docket Number: No. 00-1371
Parties: Mary T. BROWN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Kenneth S. APFEL, Commissioner of Social Security, DefendantAppellee.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 21
Pages: 125–126

Head Matter:
Mary T. BROWN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Kenneth S. APFEL, Commissioner of Social Security, DefendantAppellee.
No. 00-1371.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Sept. 29, 2000.
Decided Oct. 19, 2001.
Robert A. Williams, Jerry L. Williams, Williams, Luck & Williams, Danville, VA, for appellant. David W. Ogden, Acting Assistant Attorney General, Walter C. Holton, Jr., United States Attorney, Mary Ann Sloan, Regional Chief, Dennis R. Williams, Deputy Regional Chief, John C. Stoner, Assistant Regional, Brian C. Huberty, Assistant Regional, Office of the General, Social Security Administration, Atlanta, GA, for appellee.
Before NIEMEYER and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
OPINION
PER CURIAM.
Mary T. Brown seeks to appeal the district court's order affirming the Commissioner's denial of disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income. See Brown v. Apfel, No. CA-98-907-1 (M.D.N.C. Jan. 31, 2000). Recently, 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(c), 416.920(c), subpart P, appendix 1, section 12.05(C) was revised. 65 Fed.Reg. 50,746, 50,772, 50,776, 50,780 (Aug. 21, 2000). This revision pertains to the central issue in Brown's case— whether she had another physical or mental impairment under § 12.05(C). The Administrative Law Judge's decision to deny benefits rested on the finding that Brown could still perform her past work as a housekeeper. This finding is no longer dispositive in light of the revised regulation. Because the revised regulation was not available to the ALJ when she denied Brown's claim, we remand this case to the district court with instructions to remand it to the ALJ for reconsideration in fight of the revised regulation. In doing so, we express no opinion as to the merits of Brown's claim. We grant the motion to substitute Jerry L. Williams, Jr., as counsel for Brown. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
VACATED AND REMANDED WITH INSTRUCTIONS.