Moon v. Commisioner of Social Security

Filing 21

STIPULATION AND ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 5/19/2016 REMANDING this matter to the Office of Disability Adjudication and Review; REVERSING the final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security. CASE CLOSED. (Michel, G.)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

PHILLIP A. TALBERT
Acting United States Attorney
DEBORAH LEE STACHEL, CSBN# 6191786
Acting Regional Chief Counsel, Region IX
Social Security Administration
RICHARD M. RODRIGUEZ
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

9
10

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

11

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

12

SACRAMENTO DIVISION

13
14

ANDY ALLEN MOON,

15
16
17

Plaintiff,
v.
CAROLYN W. COLVIN,
Acting Commissioner of Social Security,

18
19

Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 2:14-CV-00861-AC
STIPULATION TO VOLUNTARY
REMAND PURSUANT TO SENTENCE
FOUR OF 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) AND TO
ENTRY OF JUDGMENT FOR PLAINTIFF

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between Plaintiff, Andy Allen Moon, and
Defendant, Carolyn W. Colvin, Acting Commissioner of Social Security (Defendant) through
their respective counsel of record, and with the approval of the Court, that the Commissioner of
Social Security has agreed to a voluntary remand of this case for further administrative action
pursuant to 205(g) of the Social Security Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. section 405(g) sentence four.
Upon remand, the Office of Disability Adjudication and Review’s Appeal Council will
remand this 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

Moon v. Colvin, 2:14-cv-00861- AC – Jt. Stip. Remand

1

1

subjective complaints consistent with the applicable regulations, Social Security Rulings, and

2

Ninth Circuit case law.

3

The Appeals Council will also instruct the ALJ to reassess Plaintiff’s residual functional

4

capacity, and determine whether Plaintiff could perform any other work existing in significant

5

numbers in the national economy given his age, education, vocational factors, and residual

6
7
8

functional capacity.
The parties’ further request the Clerk of the Court be directed to enter a final judgment in
favor of Plaintiff, and against Defendant, reversing the final decision of the Commissioner.

9

Respectfully submitted,

10
Date: May 18, 2016

/s/Robert C. Weems
Robert C. Weems, CSBN 148156
Attorney at Law
Attorney for Plaintiff
*By email authorization on May 17, 2016

Date: May 18, 2016

PHILLIP A. TALBERT
Acting United States Attorney

11
12
13
14
15
By:

16
17

/s/Richard M. Rodriguez
Richard M. Rodriguez
Special Assistant United States Attorney
Attorneys for Defendant

18
19
ORDER

20
21
22

APPROVED AND SO ORDERED:

23
24
25

DATED: May 19, 2016

26
27
28

Moon v. Colvin, 2:14-cv-00861- AC – Jt. Stip. Remand

2