Consulting examiner's opinions carry no less weight than those of the treating physician. Post - McDonald decision. Discussion of SSR 85-28.

"Good cause" for remand due to Secretary's failure to develop record. ALJ is not at liberty to substitute his own impression of an individual's health for uncontroverted medical opinion. Given unchallenged diagnosis of chronic schizophrenia, coupled with uncontradicted testimony concerning claimant's degeneration in recent years and evidence of gross interference with his interpersonal relations, finding of no severe impairment was not supported by substantial evidence. If Secretary is doubtful as to severity of claimant's mental disorder, appropriate course is to request a consultative evaluation, not to rely on the lay impressions of the ALJ. ALJ incorrectly applied "Listing" standard at Step 2. Certain mental abilities are a prerequisite to working: the regulations suggest as prerequisite to working: the ability to understand, carry out and remember simple instructions, to use sound judgment, to respond appropriately to supervision, co-workers and usual work situations and to deal with changes in a routine work setting. While claimant bears the burden of proof on the issue of disability, the Secretary nonetheless retains a certain obligation to develop an adequate record from which a reasonable conclusion can be drawn.

Approves administrative notice of occupational reference materials for information regarding various types of work. Court notes that the 4th circuit has held that the Secretary may rely on general categories in the Supplement to the DOT as presumptively applicable to the claimant's past work. Claimant's burden to prove an inability to perform her former type of work. necessarily includes an obligation to produce evidence on that issue. Claimant must not only show that she cannot do her former job, she must demonstrate that she cannot return to her former type of work. Opinions of non-examining consulting physicians are entitled to weight. Physician's conclusory statements about claimant's disability not binding on Secretary. The Secretary can rely on a job held more than 10 years ago in determining whether claimant can return to prior work. In order to meet burden at step 4, claimant must establish that she cannot return to her former type of work, not just her inability to return to a particular past job.

Unemployment Benefits.Although Court has reservations about the significance of evidence that claimant collected unemployment benefits, Court is reluctant to say that a claimant's decision to hold himself out as able to work for the purpose of receiving unemployment benefits may never be considered on the issue of disability. Secretary's consideration of the claimant's receipt of unemployment benefits is not subject to reversal where claimant's receipt of such benefits was not a decisive factor in the denial of benefits and where there was medical and vocational evidence supporting the decision. One CE report can be substantial evidence of non-disability in face of multiple reports from treating physicians showing disability.

A treating physician's opinion may be rejected by the Secretary, who may accord greater weight to his own experts. Treating physician's diagnosis is not necessarily entitled to more weight than CEs.