Hernandez v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 20

ORDER APPROVING AMENDED STIPULATION TO REMAND re 17 signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 9/22/16. The Clerk of Court shall enter an Amended Judgment in accordance with this order, which shall amend the judgment previously entered on 9/9/16.(Mena-Sanchez, L)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 BENJAMIN B. WAGNER United States Attorney DEBORAH LEE STACHEL Regional Chief Counsel, Region IX Social Security Administration HEATHER M. MOSS, DCBN 995773 Special Assistant United States Attorney 160 Spear Street, Suite 800 San Francisco, CA 94105 Phone: 415-977-8826 Fax: 415-744-0134 Email: heather.moss@ssa.gov Attorneys for Defendant 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 11 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 12 SACRAMENTO DIVISION 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 STEPHANY KATHY HERNANDEZ, Plaintiff, vs. CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant. 20 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. 2:15-cv-01534-KJN ORDER APPROVING AMENDED STIPULATION TO REMAND PURSUANT TO SENTENCE FOUR OF 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), AND REQUEST FOR ENTRY OF JUDGMENT IN FAVOR OF PLAINTIFF 21 As amended, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED, by and between the parties, through their 22 respective counsel of record, that this action be remanded to the Commissioner of Social Security for 23 further administrative action pursuant to section 205(g) of the Social Security Act, as amended, 42 24 U.S.C. § 405(g), sentence four. This amended stipulation and request for entry of judgment seeks to 25 withdraw and replace the prior stipulation and order. 26 27 1 28 Amended Stip. to Remand, 2:15-cv-01534-KJN 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Counsel for Defendant inadvertently cited Social Security Ruling (SSR) 96-7p, which is no longer in effect. The amended stipulation references SSR 16-03p, which supersedes SSR 96-7p, and updates relevant language. Counsel for Defendant sincerely apologizes for any inconvenience that her error has caused. This amendment is necessary to ensure that the stipulation and order is in accordance with current law. On remand, the Appeals 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:  Subpart P, Appendix 1 in accordance with 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.920(d), 416.925, and 416.926. 10 11   14 15 Reassess the claimant’s subjective complaints consistent with 20 C.F.R. § 416.929 and Social Security Ruling (SSR) 16-3p. 12 13 Reevaluate whether the claimant met or equaled a listed impairment in 20 C.F.R. Part 404, Reassess other source evidence consistent with 20 C.F.R. § 416.913(d), 416.929(c)(3), 416.945(a)(3), and SSR 06-3p.  As appropriate, further evaluate the claimant’s residual functional capacity and, if 16 appropriate, obtain supplemental vocational expert testimony to assist in determining what 17 jobs exist, if any, for the claimant given her age, education, vocational factors and residual 18 functional capacity. 19 The parties further request that the Clerk of the Court be directed to enter an amended final 20 judgment in favor of Plaintiff, and against Defendant, Commissioner of Social Security, reversing the 21 final decision of the Commissioner. Respectfully submitted, 22 23 Dated: September 21, 2016 24 25 By: /s/ Richard A. Whitaker* RICHARD A. WHITAKER Attorney for Plaintiff *By email authorization on September 20, 2016 26 27 2 28 Amended Stip. to Remand, 2:15-cv-01534-KJN 1 BENJAMIN B. WAGNER United States Attorney DEBORAH LEE STACHEL Regional Chief Counsel, Region IX Social Security Administration 2 3 4 6 By: Heather M. Moss HEATHER M. MOSS Special Assistant United States Attorney 7 ORDER 5 8 9 Dated: September 21, 2016 APPROVED AND SO ORDERED. The Clerk of Court shall enter an amended judgment in accordance with this order, which shall amend the judgment previously entered on September 9, 2016. 10 11 Dated: September 22, 2016 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 3 28 Amended Stip. to Remand, 2:15-cv-01534-KJN

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?