United States v. Oppenheimer-Torres

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• demanding that the ALJ set forth its reasoning in a way 3 that allows for meaningful review
• concluding both that the prosecutor's misstatement \did not constitute a breach of the agreement\ and that it was \not obvious that there was a breach that was not adequately corrected\
• finding that an ALJ’s failure to identify and explain why a 4 claimant’s subjective testimony is not credible constitutes reversible error because the 5 reviewing court cannot determine if the ALJ’s decision was supported by substantial 6 evidence
• finding that the ALJ 16 committed legal error where “the ALJ failed to identify the testimony she found not 17 credible, [and] did not link that testimony to the particular parts of the record 18 supporting her non-credibility determination.”
• “[W]e leave it to the ALJ to determine 4 credibility, resolve conflicts in the testimony, and resolve 5 ambiguities in the record.”
• noting how Puckett changed the law in this circuit

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).