Hall v. Colvin, C13-1679JLR. (2018)
Court: District Court, D. Washington
Number: infdco20180323i03
Visitors: 29
Filed: Mar. 22, 2018
Latest Update: Mar. 22, 2018
Summary: ORDER REMANDING MATTER TO ALJ JAMES L. ROBART , District Judge . On July 21, 2014, the court affirmed the Commissioner of Social Security's denial of Plaintiff Michael W. Hall's application for Social Security disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income. (7/21/14 Order (Dkt. # 20); Judgment (Dkt. # 21).) Mr. Hall appealed that ruling to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. ( See Not. of Appeal (Dkt. # 22).) On December 15, 2017, the Ninth Circuit reversed and remanded "[b
Summary: ORDER REMANDING MATTER TO ALJ JAMES L. ROBART , District Judge . On July 21, 2014, the court affirmed the Commissioner of Social Security's denial of Plaintiff Michael W. Hall's application for Social Security disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income. (7/21/14 Order (Dkt. # 20); Judgment (Dkt. # 21).) Mr. Hall appealed that ruling to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. ( See Not. of Appeal (Dkt. # 22).) On December 15, 2017, the Ninth Circuit reversed and remanded "[b]..
More
ORDER REMANDING MATTER TO ALJ
JAMES L. ROBART, District Judge.
On July 21, 2014, the court affirmed the Commissioner of Social Security's denial of Plaintiff Michael W. Hall's application for Social Security disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income. (7/21/14 Order (Dkt. # 20); Judgment (Dkt. # 21).) Mr. Hall appealed that ruling to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. (See Not. of Appeal (Dkt. # 22).) On December 15, 2017, the Ninth Circuit reversed and remanded "[b]ecause the functional limitations identified by the [administrative law judge ("ALJ")] in the [residual functional capacity] for medium work were not supported by medical evidence in the record," requiring reevaluation of the "sequential evaluation process." (Mem. (Dkt. # 26) at 5.) The Ninth Circuit issued its mandate on February 6, 2018. (Mandate (Dkt. # 27).) Accordingly, the court REMANDS this matter to the ALJ for further proceedings consistent with the Ninth Circuit's ruling. (See Mem. at 6.)
Source: Leagle
