Shank v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 22

STIPULATION and ORDER for Voluntary Remand Pursuant to Sentence Four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 03/22/2017. CASE CLOSED.(Flores, E)

1
2
3
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4
5

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6

FRESNO DIVISION

7

TUESDAY KIMBERLY SHANK,

8
9
10
11
12
13

Plaintiff,
v.
NANCY A, BERRYHILL,
Acting Commissioner of Social Security,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Civil No. 1:16-cv-00423-GSA
STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR
VOLUNTARY REMAND PURSUANT TO
SENTENCE FOUR OF 42 U.S.C. § 405(g)

14
15
16

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties, through their undersigned

17

attorneys, and with the approval of the Court, that the Commissioner of Social Security has

18

agreed to a voluntary remand of this case pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). The

19

purpose of the remand is to offer Plaintiff a new hearing and decision.

20

On remand, the Appeals Council will remand the case to an administrative law judge

21

(ALJ) with instructions to reevaluate the medical evidence of record, reassess Plaintiff’s residual

22

functional capacity, make a new credibility determination, and take any further action deemed

23

necessary to develop the record and issue a new decision.

24
25
26

Respectfully submitted,
Date: March 21, 2017

FORSLUND LAW LLC

27
28

By:

/s/ Jacqueline Forslund*
JAQUELINE FORSLUND
1

* By email authorization on March 21, 2017
Attorney for Plaintiff

1
2
Date: March 21, 2017

PHILIP A. TALBERT
United States Attorney

3
4

By:

5
6

/s/ Jeffrey Chen
JEFFREY CHEN
Special Assistant United States Attorney
Attorneys for Defendant

7
8
9

ORDER

10
11
12
13
14
15

Pursuant to the stipulation filed by the parties on March 21, 2017 (Doc. 21), this case is
remanded to the Commissioner under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). The purpose of the
remand is to offer Plaintiff a new hearing and decision.
On remand, the Appeals Council will remand the case to an administrative law judge
(ALJ) with instructions to reevaluate the medical evidence of record, reassess Plaintiff’s residual
functional capacity, make a new credibility determination, and take any further action deemed

16
necessary to develop the record and issue a new decision.
17
18
19

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20
21

Dated:

March 22, 2017

/s/ Gary S. Austin
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2