Acosta v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 19

ORDER re Stipulation for Voluntary Remand Pursuant to Sentence Four signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 7/22/2015. CASE CLOSED. (Jessen, A)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

BENJAMIN B. WAGNER
United States Attorney
DONNA L. CALVERT
Regional Chief Counsel, Region IX
Social Security Administration
ESTHER KIM
Special Assistant United States Attorney
160 Spear Street, Suite 800
San Francisco, California 94105
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
E-Mail: [e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendant

10

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

11

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

12

FRESNO DIVISION

13
14

RICHARD NICHOLAS ACOSTA, SR.,

15

Plaintiff,

16

vs.

17
18
19

CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting Commissioner
of Social Security,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CIVIL NO. 1:14-cv-01422-BAM
STIPULATION AND ORDER TO
VOLUNTARY REMAND PURSUANT
TO SENTENCE FOUR OF 42 U.S.C.
§ 405(g) AND TO ENTRY OF
JUDGMENT

20
21
22

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by the parties, through their undersigned attorneys, and with the
approval of the Court, that the Commissioner has agreed to a voluntary remand of this case pursuant to

23
24

sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).

25

On remand, the Appeals Council will remand the case to an administrative law judge (ALJ) for a

26

new hearing and decision. The Appeals Council will instruct the ALJ to update the record and further

27

consider Plaintiff’s physical medically determinable impairments at steps 2 and 3 of the sequential evaluation

28

process, and in so doing, obtain consultative expert evidence to assist by providing a longitudinal overview

1

of the nature, severity, and limiting effects of Plaintiff’s physical medically determinable impairments

2

throughout the period at issue; further evaluate all of the medical opinions of record, and give reasons for the

3

weight assigned, further evaluate Plaintiff’s maximum residual functional capacity with citations to evidence

4
of record in support of the assessed limitations, and at step five, obtain supplemental vocational expert

5
6
7

evidence and resolve any conflicts between the vocational expert testimony and the Dictionary of
Occupational Titles.

The parties further request that the Clerk of the Court be directed to enter a final judgment in

8
9

favor of Plaintiff, and against Defendant, reversing the final decision of the Commissioner.

10

Respectfully submitted,

11
12

Dated: July 21, 2015

BENJAMIN B. WAGNER
United States Attorney
DONNA L. CALVERT
Acting Regional Chief Counsel, Region IX
Social Security Administration

13
14
15

By:

16
17

/s/ Esther Kim
Esther Kim
Special Assistant U.S. Attorney
Attorneys for Defendant

18
19

Dated: July 21, 2015
_/s/ Shellie Lott____________
Shellie Lott
(as authorized via email)
Attorney at Law
Attorney for Plaintiff

20
21
22
23
24

///

25

///

26

///

27
28
-2-

1
2
3

ORDER
Pursuant to the Stipulation of the parties (Doc. 18), it is hereby ORDERED this action be
remanded to the Commissioner of Social Security for further administrative action consistent with the

4
5
6
7
8

above Stipulation.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

/s/ Barbara

July 22, 2015

A. McAuliffe

_

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-3-