Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

WILSON v. ASTRUE, C11-2009-JLR-MAT. (2012)

Court: District Court, D. Washington Number: infdco20120523e89 Visitors: 11
Filed: May 22, 2012
Latest Update: May 22, 2012
Summary: AMENDED REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION MARY ALICE THEILER, Magistrate Judge. Plaintiff brought this action to seek judicial review of the denial of her applications for a period of Disability, Disability Insurance Benefits (DIB), and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) by the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration. The parties have now stipulated that this case should be reversed and remanded pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. 405(g). (Dkt. 18.) Based on the stipulation of the par
More

AMENDED REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

MARY ALICE THEILER, Magistrate Judge.

Plaintiff brought this action to seek judicial review of the denial of her applications for a period of Disability, Disability Insurance Benefits (DIB), and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) by the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration. The parties have now stipulated that this case should be reversed and remanded pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). (Dkt. 18.)

Based on the stipulation of the parties, the Court recommends that this case be REVERSED and REMANDED for further administrative proceedings. The parties have stipulated that, on remand, the Appeals Council1 will: (1) issue an order vacating the October 4, 2011 Notice of Decision — Unfavorable and reinstating and affirming the prior finding of disability beginning August 29, 2008; and (2) remand and assign the case to a new Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) for a de novo hearing limited to the issue of whether plaintiff's disability began prior to August 29, 2008. In considering the limited issue, the new ALJ will: (1) re-evaluate the medical source opinions of record; (2) re-evaluate plaintiff's residual functional capacity; (3) obtain supplemental vocational expert testimony to reassess the requirements of plaintiff's past relevant work and/or accurately identify any comparable counterpart in the Dictionary of Occupational Titles; and (4) take no action to disturb the finding that plaintiff has been disabled since August 29, 2008. Additionally, upon proper application, the Court will consider plaintiff's application for attorney fees and expenses pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2412, and costs pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1920.

Given the above, the Court recommends that United States District Judge James L. Robart immediately approve this Report and Recommendation and order the case REVERSED and REMANDED for further administrative proceedings. A proposed order accompanies this Report and Recommendation.

FootNotes


1. The prior Report and Recommendation mistakenly directed this task to the Administrative Law Judge.
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