Bubna v. Berryhill, 2:18-cv-00677-JCM-VCF. (2018)
Court: District Court, D. Nevada
Number: infdco20181102k37
Visitors: 12
Filed: Nov. 01, 2018
Latest Update: Nov. 01, 2018
Summary: STIPULATION & ORDER TO REMAND PURSUANT TO SENTENCE FOUR OF 42 U.S.C. 405(g) CAM FERENBACH , Magistrate Judge . IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED, by and between plaintiff Wendy W. Bubna (Plaintiff) and Nancy A. Berryhill, Acting Commissioner of Social Security (the Commissioner or Defendant), through their respective counsel of record, and with the approval of the Court, that this action be remanded for further administrative proceedings pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. 405(g). On remand
Summary: STIPULATION & ORDER TO REMAND PURSUANT TO SENTENCE FOUR OF 42 U.S.C. 405(g) CAM FERENBACH , Magistrate Judge . IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED, by and between plaintiff Wendy W. Bubna (Plaintiff) and Nancy A. Berryhill, Acting Commissioner of Social Security (the Commissioner or Defendant), through their respective counsel of record, and with the approval of the Court, that this action be remanded for further administrative proceedings pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. 405(g). On remand,..
More
STIPULATION & ORDER TO REMAND PURSUANT TO SENTENCE FOUR OF 42 U.S.C. § 405(g)
CAM FERENBACH, Magistrate Judge.
IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED, by and between plaintiff Wendy W. Bubna (Plaintiff) and Nancy A. Berryhill, Acting Commissioner of Social Security (the Commissioner or Defendant), through their respective counsel of record, and with the approval of the Court, that this action be remanded for further administrative proceedings pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).
On remand, the Appeals Council will remand the case to an administrative law judge (ALJ) for a new decision. The Appeals Council will instruct the ALJ to further consider the nature, severity and functional limitations related to the claimant's CRPS in a manner consistent with Social Security Ruling 03-02p; to reconsider the claimant's ability to interact with others; to reassess the claimant's maximum residual functional capacity; to reassess the claimant's subjective complaints; if necessary, to obtain supplemental evidence from a vocational expert and clarify any conflicts between the testimony of the vocational expert and the Dictionary of Occupational Titles; to offer the claimant a supplemental hearing; and to issue a new decision.
The parties further request that the Clerk of the Court be directed to enter a final judgment in favor of Plaintiff, and against Defendant, reversing the final decision of the Commissioner.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
