Filed: Sep. 02, 2015
Latest Update: Sep. 02, 2015
Summary: ORDER EILEEN S. WILLETT , Magistrate Judge . The Court has considered Motion for Remand (Doc. 19), Plaintiff's Response (Doc. 20), and Defendant's Reply (Doc. 21). The matter is deemed submitted for decision. The parties are in agreement that remand is appropriate and the factual basis for remand is not in dispute. The Court has jurisdiction pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 405(g). Both parties have consented to U.S. Magistrate Judge jurisdiction (Doc. 11). The Court finds that proper notification pr
Summary: ORDER EILEEN S. WILLETT , Magistrate Judge . The Court has considered Motion for Remand (Doc. 19), Plaintiff's Response (Doc. 20), and Defendant's Reply (Doc. 21). The matter is deemed submitted for decision. The parties are in agreement that remand is appropriate and the factual basis for remand is not in dispute. The Court has jurisdiction pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 405(g). Both parties have consented to U.S. Magistrate Judge jurisdiction (Doc. 11). The Court finds that proper notification pro..
More
ORDER
EILEEN S. WILLETT, Magistrate Judge.
The Court has considered Motion for Remand (Doc. 19), Plaintiff's Response (Doc. 20), and Defendant's Reply (Doc. 21). The matter is deemed submitted for decision. The parties are in agreement that remand is appropriate and the factual basis for remand is not in dispute. The Court has jurisdiction pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 405(g). Both parties have consented to U.S. Magistrate Judge jurisdiction (Doc. 11).
The Court finds that proper notification procedures were not followed by the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) in determining that Plaintiff did not have good cause for failing to appear at a hearing. The error was not harmless because the ALJ must consider the good cause reasons provided by a claimant under 20 C.F.R. §§ 405.380, 405.20(a). The ALJ failed to do so. See Tommasetti v. Astrue, 533 F.3d 1035, 1038 (9th Cir. 2008) (citations omitted); Molina v. Astrue, 674 F.3d 1104, 1115 (an error is harmless so long as there remains substantial evidence supporting the ALJ's decision and the error "does not negate the validity of the ALJ's ultimate conclusion") (citations omitted). Remand is required under sentence six of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for further administrative proceedings.
The Court further finds that a determination of good cause by this Court or an award of benefits is not appropriate. The ALJ did not hold a hearing on the merits. Nor did the ALJ consider any information presented by the Plaintiff regarding good cause for failing to appear at the hearing. The District Court is not a finder of fact in the first instance. Remand for development of the administrative record is appropriate. See Trerchler v. Comm'r of Social Sec Admin, 775 F.3d 1090 (9th Cir. 2014).
Therefore,
IT IS ORDERED that the decision of the ALJ (Doc. 13-1 at 11-12) is reversed.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED remanding the case for further administrative proceedings pursuant to sentence six of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). The Appeals Council shall instruct the ALJ to further develop the record as to whether the Plaintiff had good cause for failing to appear at the hearing by mailing a Form HA-L90 and giving Plaintiff the opportunity to explain her absence. The ALJ shall consider if Plaintiff established good cause and reschedule the hearing if necessary.
