Filed: Jun. 05, 2013
Latest Update: Jun. 05, 2013
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER TO REOPEN CAROLYN K. DELANEY, Magistrate Judge. The parties hereby stipulate, through their undersigned attorneys, and with the approval of the Court, that this case shall be reopened. On March 10, 2011, pursuant to the stipulation of the parties, this Court remanded the instant case to the Commissioner for a new hearing. The parties stipulated to remand this case because Defendant was unable to prepare the certified administrative record the hearing file being unavailab
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER TO REOPEN CAROLYN K. DELANEY, Magistrate Judge. The parties hereby stipulate, through their undersigned attorneys, and with the approval of the Court, that this case shall be reopened. On March 10, 2011, pursuant to the stipulation of the parties, this Court remanded the instant case to the Commissioner for a new hearing. The parties stipulated to remand this case because Defendant was unable to prepare the certified administrative record the hearing file being unavailabl..
More
STIPULATION AND ORDER TO REOPEN
CAROLYN K. DELANEY, Magistrate Judge.
The parties hereby stipulate, through their undersigned attorneys, and with the approval of the Court, that this case shall be reopened.
On March 10, 2011, pursuant to the stipulation of the parties, this Court remanded the instant case to the Commissioner for a new hearing. The parties stipulated to remand this case because Defendant was unable to prepare the certified administrative record the hearing file being unavailable. The proceedings on remand have culminated in an April 20, 2012 decision unfavorable to Plaintiff.
Now that the administrative proceedings have concluded, reopening is necessary. In a sentence-six remand case, the Court retains jurisdiction following the remand. See Melkonyan v. Sullivan, 501 U.S. 89, 98 (1991) (district court retains jurisdiction over Social Security cases remanded under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), sentence six, and where the final administrative decision is favorable to one party or the other, the Commissioner is to return to the court following completion of the administrative proceedings on remand so that the court may enter a final judgment or, as in this case, a dismissal); see also Shalala v. Schaefer, 509 U.S. 292, 298-300 (1993).
[A] sentence six remand, because of clear language in the social security statute, implies and necessarily involves a reservation of jurisdiction for the future and contemplates further proceedings in the district court and a final judgment at the conclusion thereof. A sentence six remand judgment, the Court said, is therefore always interlocutory and never a "final" judgment.
Carrol v. Sullivan, 802 F.Supp. 295, 300 (C. D. Cal. 1992) (paraphrasing and quoting Melkonyan).
It is therefore appropriate to reopen this case in order to resolve the Court's sentence-six jurisdiction. Upon reopening, Defendant will serve the certified administrative record within 120 days of this Court's order.
ORDER
Pursuant to stipulation, it is so ordered.
