Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Grewell v Commissioner of Social Security, 2:17-cv-00151-MKD. (2018)

Court: District Court, D. Washington Number: infdco20180129d44 Visitors: 4
Filed: Jan. 25, 2018
Latest Update: Jan. 25, 2018
Summary: ORDER GRANTING STIPULATED MOTION FOR REMAND PURSUANT TO SENTENCE FOUR OF 42 U.S.C. 405(g) AND CLOSING FILE ECF Nos. 12, 16 MARY K. DIMKE , Magistrate Judge . BEFORE THE COURT is the parties' Stipulated Motion for Remand (ECF No. 16) of the above-captioned matter to the Commissioner for additional administrative proceeding pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. 405(g). Attorney Gary Penar represents Plaintiff. Attorney Leisa Wolf represents Defendant. The parties have consented to procee
More

ORDER GRANTING STIPULATED MOTION FOR REMAND PURSUANT TO SENTENCE FOUR OF 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) AND CLOSING FILE ECF Nos. 12, 16

BEFORE THE COURT is the parties' Stipulated Motion for Remand (ECF No. 16) of the above-captioned matter to the Commissioner for additional administrative proceeding pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). Attorney Gary Penar represents Plaintiff. Attorney Leisa Wolf represents Defendant. The parties have consented to proceed before a magistrate judge. ECF No. 4. After considering the file and proposed order, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:

1. The parties' Stipulated Motion for Remand (ECF No. 16) is GRANTED.

2. The above-captioned case is REVERSED and REMANDED to the Commissioner of Social Security for further administrative proceeding pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).

The parties agree on and the Court ORDERS the following terms:

On remand, the Appeals Council will direct the administrative law judge (ALJ) to offer Plaintiff an opportunity for a new hearing, further develop the record and update the medical records, and issue a new decision. Upon remand, the ALJ shall also:

• Reevaluate the medical evidence of record; • Reconsider the Veterans Administration determinations of disability; • Obtain evidence from a medical expert or additional consultative examination, if warranted; • Reevaluate Plaintiff's subjective complaints1; and • Reassess the remaining steps of the sequential evaluation process with the assistance of vocational expert evidence with the assistance of vocational expert, if necessary.

3. Judgment shall be entered for PLAINTIFF.

4. Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 12) is STRICKEN AS MOOT.

5. Upon proper presentation, this Court will consider Plaintiff's application for fees and expenses under the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d).

The District Court Executive is directed to enter this Order, enter Judgment, forward copies to counsel, and CLOSE THE FILE.

FootNotes


1. In March 2016, the Social Security Administration implemented Social Security Ruling (SSR) 16-4p, 2016 WL 1119029 (Mar. 16, 2016), rescinding SSR 96-7p, 1996 WL 374186 (July 2, 1996) to "eliminate[e] the use of the term `credibility'" from the ALJ's subjective testimony analysis and "clarify that subjective symptom evaluation is not an examination of an individual's character" or "truthfulness in the manner typically used during an adversarial court litigation." 2016 WL 119029, at *1-10. Accordingly, the Court has modified the parties' use of the term "credibility" in this agreed term.
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