Trevino v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 16

ORDER granting 15 Motion to Remand to Social Security Administration. FURTHER ORDERED directing the Clerk of the Court to remand this matter to the Social Security Administration. Upon remand, the Appeals Council shall instruct the administrative l aw judge to redetermine the severity of Plaintiff's impairments at step two of the five-step sequential evaluation process, proceed through the remaining steps of the sequential evaluation, and properly evaluate all opinion evidence of record, providing specific reasons supported by the record for the weight assigned to each opinion. Signed by Judge G Murray Snow on 7/21/10.(KMG)

Trevino v. Commissioner of Social Security

Doc. 16

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

WO
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

) ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) ) Michael J. Astrue, Commissioner of Social) ) Security, ) ) Defendant. ) ) Guadalupe C. Trevino,

No. CV-10-298-PHX-GMS ORDER

Pending before the Court is Defendant's Unopposed Motion to Remand (Doc. 15) pursuant to sentence four of Section 405(g) of the Social Security Act.1 For good cause showing, IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Defendant's Unopposed Motion to Remand (Doc. 15) is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED directing the Clerk of the Court to remand this matter to the Social Security Administration. Upon remand, the Appeals Council shall instruct the administrative law judge to redetermine the severity of Plaintiff's impairments at step two of the five-step sequential
1

"Under sentence four" of § 405(g) of the Act, "a district court may remand in conjunction with a judgment affirming, modifying, or reversing the [Commissioner's] decision." Melkonyan v. Sullivan, 501 U.S. 89, 99­100 (1991) (citing 42 U.S.C. § 405(g)).

Dockets.Justia.com

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

evaluation process, proceed through the remaining steps of the sequential evaluation, and properly evaluate all opinion evidence of record, providing specific reasons supported by the record for the weight assigned to each opinion. DATED this 21st day of July, 2010.

-2-