Miller v. Berryhill, 3:17-CV-05475-JLR. (2018)
Court: District Court, D. Washington
Number: infdco20180221e14
Visitors: 5
Filed: Jan. 22, 2018
Latest Update: Jan. 22, 2018
Summary: ORDER JAMES L. ROBART , District Judge . It is hereby ORDERED that the Commissioner's final decision should be reversed and remanded for a new hearing pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. 405(g). The hearing shall be de novo, and Plaintiff may submit new evidence and raise new issues. Further, upon remand, the Administrative Law Judge will reconsider the nature and severity of the claimant's headaches; reconsider the opinions of the State agency medical consultants, Drs. Kester and Fitt
Summary: ORDER JAMES L. ROBART , District Judge . It is hereby ORDERED that the Commissioner's final decision should be reversed and remanded for a new hearing pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. 405(g). The hearing shall be de novo, and Plaintiff may submit new evidence and raise new issues. Further, upon remand, the Administrative Law Judge will reconsider the nature and severity of the claimant's headaches; reconsider the opinions of the State agency medical consultants, Drs. Kester and Fitte..
More
ORDER
JAMES L. ROBART, District Judge.
It is hereby ORDERED that the Commissioner's final decision should be reversed and remanded for a new hearing pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). The hearing shall be de novo, and Plaintiff may submit new evidence and raise new issues. Further, upon remand, the Administrative Law Judge will reconsider the nature and severity of the claimant's headaches; reconsider the opinions of the State agency medical consultants, Drs. Kester and Fitterer, and examining psychiatrist Dr. McCabe; reassess the claimant's maximum residual functional capacity; schedule a new administrative hearing; and issue a new decision. Upon proper application, Plaintiff shall be eligible for attorneys' fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act, 24 U.S.C. § 2412 et seq.
Source: Leagle
