HARVEY v. COLVIN, 13-CV-5136-TOR. (2014)
Court: District Court, D. Washington
Number: infdco20141016d40
Visitors: 21
Filed: Oct. 15, 2014
Latest Update: Oct. 15, 2014
Summary: ORDER GRANTING STIPULATED MOTION FOR REMAND THOMAS O. RICE, District Judge. BEFORE THE COURT is the parties' Stipulated Motion for Remand (ECF No. 18). Pursuant to the parties' stipulation, this case is hereby reversed and remanded for further administrative proceedings pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. 405(g). ACCORDINGLY, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: 1. The parties' Stipulated Motion for Remand (ECF No. 18) is GRANTED. The Commissioner's decision regarding Plaintiff's application for di
Summary: ORDER GRANTING STIPULATED MOTION FOR REMAND THOMAS O. RICE, District Judge. BEFORE THE COURT is the parties' Stipulated Motion for Remand (ECF No. 18). Pursuant to the parties' stipulation, this case is hereby reversed and remanded for further administrative proceedings pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. 405(g). ACCORDINGLY, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: 1. The parties' Stipulated Motion for Remand (ECF No. 18) is GRANTED. The Commissioner's decision regarding Plaintiff's application for dis..
More
ORDER GRANTING STIPULATED MOTION FOR REMAND
THOMAS O. RICE, District Judge.
BEFORE THE COURT is the parties' Stipulated Motion for Remand (ECF No. 18). Pursuant to the parties' stipulation, this case is hereby reversed and remanded for further administrative proceedings pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).
ACCORDINGLY, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:
1. The parties' Stipulated Motion for Remand (ECF No. 18) is GRANTED. The Commissioner's decision regarding Plaintiff's application for disability insurance benefits under Title II of the Social Security Act is REVERSED and REMANDED for further administrative proceedings pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).
2. On remand, the Appeals Council will instruct the Administrative Law Judge to (1) re-evaluate the severity of Plaintiff's mental impairments pursuant to the special technique in 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520a; (2) if warranted and available, obtain evidence from a medical expert regarding the severity and nature of Plaintiff's mental impairments, and/or updated psychological testing; (3) reconsider Plaintiff's residual functional capacity, and in so doing, further evaluate the opinion evidence from the examining and non-examining sources; (4) further evaluate the lay witness evidence pursuant to Social Security Ruling 06-03p; (5) reevaluate the evidence at step four of the sequential evaluation process, and in so doing compare the physical and mental demands of Plaintiff's past relevant work with her maximum residual functional capacity (Social Security Rulings 82-61 and 82-62); (6) if warranted, seek supplemental vocational expert testimony to determine whether there are a significant number of jobs in the national economy that Plaintiff can perform; and (7) issue a new decision.
3. Upon proper request to this Court, Plaintiff will be entitled to reasonable attorney's fees and costs pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d).
4. Plaintiff's pending Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 11) is DENIED as moot.
The District Court Executive is hereby directed to file this Order, enter JUDGMENT for Plaintiff, provide copies to counsel, and CLOSE the file.
Source: Leagle
