KREPPS v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, 1:15-CV-293. (2015)
Court: District Court, N.D. Ohio
Number: infdco20151020b03
Visitors: 19
Filed: Oct. 19, 2015
Latest Update: Oct. 19, 2015
Summary: MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER KATHLEEN B. BURKE , Magistrate Judge . On October 16, 2015, the Defendant filed a Joint Motion to Remand under Sentence Four of Section 205(g) of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. 405(g), wherein she requests that the Court remand to the agency for further administrative proceedings and a new decision. Doc. 20. The parties stipulate that: The entire prior decision will be vacated, and all pertinent issues will be considered de novo. Upon receipt of the Cour
Summary: MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER KATHLEEN B. BURKE , Magistrate Judge . On October 16, 2015, the Defendant filed a Joint Motion to Remand under Sentence Four of Section 205(g) of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. 405(g), wherein she requests that the Court remand to the agency for further administrative proceedings and a new decision. Doc. 20. The parties stipulate that: The entire prior decision will be vacated, and all pertinent issues will be considered de novo. Upon receipt of the Court..
More
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
KATHLEEN B. BURKE, Magistrate Judge.
On October 16, 2015, the Defendant filed a Joint Motion to Remand under Sentence Four of Section 205(g) of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), wherein she requests that the Court remand to the agency for further administrative proceedings and a new decision. Doc. 20. The parties stipulate that:
The entire prior decision will be vacated, and all pertinent issues will be considered de novo. Upon receipt of the Court's order, the Appeals Council will remand the matter to an administrative law judge for a new hearing and a new decision, with specific instruction to the administrative law judge to reevaluate the opinions from the treating and non-examining sources and explain the weight given; reassess the claimant's residual functional capacity; and if warranted, obtain supplemental evidence from a vocational expert to clarify the effect of the reassessed limitations on the claimant's occupational base.
Doc. 20, pp. 1-2.
Upon consideration of the parties' Joint Motion, the Court hereby reverses the decision of the Commissioner and remands this matter for further proceedings consistent with the parties' Joint Motion (Doc. 20). Accordingly, Defendant's prior Motion to Remand (Doc. 18) is denied as moot.
Source: Leagle
