Cole v. Colvin

Filing 25

ORDER requesting further briefing. Signed by Judge Nandor J. Vadas on June 25, 2014. (njvlc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/25/2014)

1
2
3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

5

EUREKA DIVISION

6
7
LAURIE SUZANNE COLE

No. CV 1:13-CV-03689-NJV

8
Plaintiff,
9

ORDER REQUESTING FURTHER
BRIEFING.

v.

10
CAROLYN W. COLVIN, ACTING
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY

12
For the Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

11

Defendant
_____________________________________/

13
INTRODUCTION
14
On February 11, 2014 Plaintiff filed her Motion for Summary Judgement. On April 10, 2014
15
Defendant filed her Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment and opposition. Plaintiff filed her reply on
16
April 20, 2014.
17
The Court has reviewed the parties' submissions and requests further briefing regarding the
18
following issues:
19
1.

Plaintiff attempted several times to supplement the record. Specifically, Plaintiff

20
provided to the Administrative Law Judge ("ALJ") the names and contact information
21
of six doctors she had seen. (AR 285, 286). The AR only includes records from one
22
doctor on that list of six. (AR 313-314). What reasonable efforts did the ALJ or the
23
Social Security Administration ("SSA") take to acquire the medical records of the
24
other five listed doctors?
25
2.

It appears that Plaintiff was not able to access her electronic records to determine

26
what records she needed to supplement. Plaintiff mentioned this problem to the ALJ.
27
(AR 282). What efforts did the ALJ or SSA take to assist Plaintiff in accessing her
28
electronic records in her attempt to supplement the record?

1

3.

If there is no evidence that the ALJ attempted to contact the other physicians Plaintiff

2

listed and/or no evidence that the ALJ assisted Plaintiff in accessing her records, why

3

should the Court not remand this case pursuant to Brown v. Heckler, 713 F. 2d 441

4

(9th Cir. 1983) (remanding case for a new hearing because the ALJ did not fully and

5

fairly develop the record)?

6
7
8

Defendant shall provide a declaration addressing these issues no later than two weeks from
the date of this order. Plaintiff may respond one week thereafter.

11

UNIT
ED

10

S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA

RT
U
O

S

9
Dated: June 25, 2014

R NIA

United States Magistrate Court Judge
J. Vadas
Nandor
Judge

FO

ER

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2

A

H

15

LI

14

RT

For the Northern District of California

NANDOR J. VADAS

13

NO

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

_______________________________

12

N

F
D IS T IC T O
R

C