Gipson v. Commissioner of Social Security
Filing
18
ORDER Remanding Case, signed by Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean on 10/20/15. CASE CLOSED. (Gonzalez, R)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
JOHN L. GIPSON,
Plaintiff,
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
v.
Case No. 1:14-cv-01709-EPG
ORDER REMANDING CASE
(ECF No. 16)
CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting
Commissioner of Social Security,
Defendant.
Based upon the parties’ Stipulation for Remand (ECF No. 16), this matter shall be
remanded to the Commissioner as authorized by sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) and
judgment shall be entered for Plaintiff and against Defendant.
On remand, the Office of Disability Adjudication and Review’s Appeal Council will
remand the case to an administrative law judge (“ALJ”) for a new hearing and decision. The
Appeals Council will instruct the ALJ to reassess the credibility of Plaintiff’s subjective
complaints consistent with 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529, 416.929, and Social Security Ruling (“SSR”)
96-7p and to evaluate any lay witness evidence consistent with SSR 06-03p. The Appeals Council
will also instruct the ALJ to further evaluate whether Plaintiff has the residual functional capacity
to perform his past relevant work and, if appropriate, obtain supplemental vocational expert
testimony to assist in determining what jobs exist, if any, for Plaintiff given his age, education,
vocational factors, and residual functional capacity.
28
1
1
The Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to enter final judgment in favor of Plaintiff John L.
2
Gipson and against Defendant Carolyn W. Colvin, the Acting Commissioner of Social Security,
3
and to close this case.
4
5
IT IS SO ORDERED.
6
7
Dated:
October 20, 2015
/s/ Erica P. Grosjean
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?