(SS) Yamada v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 29

ORDER ADOPTING 28 Findings and Recommendations, GRANTING Plaintiff's 23 Motion for Summary Judgment, and Remanding for Further Proceedings Pursuant to Sentence Four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g); ORDER Directing Entry of Judgment in Favor of Plaintiff Ashley Ann Yamada and Against Commissioner of Social Security signed by District Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on 08/27/2024. CASE CLOSED. (Flores, E)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

ASHLEY ANN YAMADA,
Plaintiff,

12
13
14
15

v.
MARTIN O’MALLEY,
Commissioner of Social Security1,

16
Defendant.
17
18
19

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

Case No.: 1:20-cv-01386 JLT BAM
ORDER ADOPTING THE FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS, GRANTING
PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY
JUDGMENT, AND REMANDING FOR FURTHER
PROCEEDINGS PURSUANT TO SENTENCE
FOUR OF 42 U.S.C. § 405(g)
ORDER DIRECTING ENTRY OF JUDGMENT IN
FAVOR OF PLAINTIFF ASHLEY ANN YAMADA
AND AGAINST DEFENDANT MARTIN
O’MALLEY, COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL
SECURITY
(Docs. 23, 28)

Ashley Ann Yamada seeks judicial review of a final decision denying her application for

20
21

benefits under the Social Security Act. (Doc. 23.) The magistrate judge found the administrative law

22

judge “erred in discounting Plaintiff’s symptom testimony.” (Doc. 28 at 12; see also id. at 9-12.) As a

23

result, “the ALJ’s decision was not supported by substantial evidence in the record as a whole and was

24

not based on proper legal standards.” (Id. at 14.) The magistrate judge determined the matter should

25

be remanded for the ALJ to “address whether Plaintiff's symptoms testimony is adequately supported

26

or whether there are specific, clear and convincing reasons for rejecting Plaintiff's symptoms

27
28

Martin O’Malley became the Commissioner of Social Security on December 20, 2023. Pursuant to Rule 25(d) of the
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Court substitutes Martin O’Malley as the defendant in this case.
1

1

1

testimony.” (Id. at 13.) Therefore, the magistrate judge recommended Plaintiff’s motion for summary

2

judgment be granted, the agency’s determination to deny benefits be reversed, and judgment be

3

entered in favor of Plaintiff. (Id. at 14.)

4

The Court served the Findings and Recommendations on the parties and notified them that any

5

objections were due within 14 days. (Doc. 28 at 14.) The Court advised the parties that the “failure to

6

file objections within the specified time may result in the waiver of the ‘rights to challenge the

7

magistrate judge’s factual findings’ on appeal.” (Id., quoting Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834,

8

838-39 (9th Cir. 2014).) Neither the Commissioner or Plaintiff filed objections, and the time to do so

9

has passed.

10

According to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), this Court performed a de novo review of this case.

11

Having carefully reviewed the matter, the Court concludes the Findings and Recommendations are

12

supported by the record and proper analysis. Thus, the Court ORDERS:

13

1.

The Findings and Recommendations issued on June 28, 2024 (Doc. 28) are ADOPTED
in full.

14
15

2.

Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment (Doc. 23) is GRANTED.

16

3.

The administrative decision is reversed, and the matter is REMANDED pursuant to
sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for further proceedings.

17
18

4.

The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment in favor of Plaintiff Ashley Ann

19

Yamada, and against Defendant Martin O’Malley, Commissioner of Social Security,

20

and to close this case.

21
22
23

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

August 27, 2024

24
25
26
27
28
2