Van den Heuvel v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 29

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 11/18/2014 ORDERING the Commissioner of Social Security to file her Opposition/Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment by 12/18/2014; ORDERING the plaintiff his reply, if any, within 21 days from service of the Commissioner's opposition/cross-motion. (Michel, G)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

JOHN MARC VAN DEN HEUVEL,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14
15

No. 2:13-cv-2187-KJN (PS)

ORDER

v.
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL
SECURITY,
Defendant.

16
17

On November 13, 2014, plaintiff, who is proceeding without the assistance of counsel in this

18

action, filed a motion styled as a “motion for consideration.” (ECF No. 28.) The court construes this

19

filing to be plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment based on a liberal construction of its contents.

20

Accordingly, the Commissioner shall file her opposition and cross-motion for summary judgment by no

21

later than December 18, 2014. In addition to addressing the merits of plaintiff’s motion, the

22

Commissioner shall address in her cross-motion the impact of the additional extra-record medical evidence

23

submitted by plaintiff in connection with the request for voluntary remand he submitted to the

24

Commissioner and why the Commissioner found that additional evidence insufficient to stipulate to a

25

voluntary remand of this case.1 Plaintiff shall file a reply, if any, within 21 days from service of the

26

1

27
28

The Commissioner filed a notice of declination of voluntary remand on November 14, 2014,
that states that plaintiff submitted additional evidence not already in the record to the
Commissioner in what appeared to be a request for voluntary remand of this case in light of the
newly-submitted evidence. (ECF No. 27.) The Notice further states that the Commissioner
1

1

Commissioner’s opposition. No further briefing will be permitted in this action beyond plaintiff’s reply.

2

Furthermore, no further extensions of time will be granted in this case absent a showing of special

3

necessity by the party seeking such an extension.

4
5

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: November 18, 2014

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

reviewed plaintiff’s additional evidence and declined to stipulate to a voluntary remand of this
action. (Id.) Because it appears that plaintiff’s motion deemed to be his motion for summary
judgment relies on many of the same additional medical records he submitted in support of his
request for voluntary remand, the court finds that a statement of the evidence plaintiff submitted
along with that request and the Commissioner’s reasons for declining to remand in light of that
evidence would aid the court in resolving the merits of plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment.
2