Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

McCaskill v. Commissioner of Social Security, 1:18-cv-01069-LJO-SAB. (2019)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20190917923 Visitors: 1
Filed: Sep. 16, 2019
Latest Update: Sep. 16, 2019
Summary: ORDER RE STIPULATION FOR VOLUNTARY REMAND PURSUANT TO 42 U.S.C. 405(g) (ECF No. 33). LAWRENCE J. O'NEILL , Chief District Judge . On August 9, 2018, Plaintiff filed the present action seeking review of the Commissioner's denial of an application for benefits. (ECF No. 1.) On September 10, 2019, the parties filed a stipulation agreeing to a voluntary remand of this matter pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 405(g). (ECF No. 33.) 1 Pursuant to the terms of the stipulation, upon remand to the agency,
More

ORDER RE STIPULATION FOR VOLUNTARY REMAND PURSUANT TO 42 U.S.C. § 405(g)

(ECF No. 33).

On August 9, 2018, Plaintiff filed the present action seeking review of the Commissioner's denial of an application for benefits. (ECF No. 1.) On September 10, 2019, the parties filed a stipulation agreeing to a voluntary remand of this matter pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). (ECF No. 33.)1 Pursuant to the terms of the stipulation, upon remand to the agency, the Appeals Council will remand this case to an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) with instructions to reevaluate the medical evidence, including, but not limited to, consideration of Plaintiff's carpal tunnel syndrome and the opinion of treating physician Dr. Rodrigo De Zubiria, and to explain the weight given to the opinion evidence in accordance with 20 C.F.R. § 404.1527. The ALJ shall also be instructed to reassess Plaintiff's RFC, including all functional limitations supported by the record, and issue a new decision.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. This action is REMANDED to the Commissioner of Social Security for further proceedings consistent with the terms of the Stipulation to Remand; 2. Judgment is entered in favor of Plaintiff Kevin Laine McCaskill and against Defendant Commissioner of Social Security; and 3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to CLOSE this action.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

FootNotes


1. The Court notes that the filed stipulation contains the incorrect case number in the caption, however the party names are correct in the caption and within the body of the stipulation.
Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer