Alfaro v. Astrue

Filing 17

STIPULATION AND ORDER re for Remand Pursuant to Sentence Four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), and Request for Entry of Judgment in Favor of Plaintiff and against Defendant filed by Michael J. Astrue. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 9/28/12. (bpf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/28/2012)

Case3:12-cv-01999-EMC Document16 Filed09/27/12 Page1 of 2

1

8

MELINDA L. HAAG, CSBN 132612
United States Attorney
DONNA L. CALVERT, SBN IL 6191786
Acting Regional Chief Counsel, Region IX
Social Security Administration
DANIEL P. TALBERT, SBN OH 0084088
Special Assistant United States Attorney
160 Spear Street, Suite 800
San Francisco, California 94105
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
E-Mail: [e-mail]

9

Attorneys for Defendant

2
3
4
5
6
7

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
MANUEL PEREZ ALFARO,
Plaintiff,

)
)
)
v.
)
)
MICHAEL J. ASTRUE,
)
Commissioner of Social Security,
)
Defendant.
)
______________________________)

CIVIL ACTION NO. 12-01999-EMC

STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER
FOR REMAND PURSUANT TO SENTENCE
FOUR OF 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), AND REQUEST
FOR JUDGMENT IN FAVOR OF
PLAINTIFF AND AGAINST DEFENDANT

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED, by and between the parties, through their respective

19 counsel of record, that this action be remanded to the Commissioner of Social Security for further
administrative action pursuant to section 205(g) of the Social Security Act, as amended, 42
20
U.S.C. § 405(g), sentence four.
21
Upon remand from the Court, the Appeals Council will remand the case to an
22
Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) for a new hearing and a new decision. The Appeals Council
23
will direct the ALJ to (1) update the treatment evidence on Plaintiff’s medical condition; (2)
24
further consider whether Plaintiff is “Spanish speaking only” or is able to communicate in
25
English, citing to substantial evidence of record; (3) expressly evaluate the treating, examining,
26 and non-examining medical source opinions in the updated record and explain the reasons for the
27 weight he gives to this opinion evidence; (4) further consider Plaintiff’s residual functional
28 capacity on the updated record, citing specific evidence in support of the assessed limitations; (5)
1

Case3:12-cv-01999-EMC Document16 Filed09/27/12 Page2 of 2

1 further consider whether Plaintiff has past relevant work he could perform with the limitations
2 established by the evidence; (6) secure supplemental evidence from a vocational expert to clarify
3 the effect of the assessed limitations on Plaintiff’s occupational base; and (7) consolidate and
4 consider together Plaintiff’s subsequent application for concurrent benefits filed on August 10,
5 2012, currently pending at the initial level.
The parties further request that the Clerk of the Court be directed to enter a final judgment
6
7

in favor of Plaintiff, and against Defendant, Commissioner of Social Security, reversing the final

8

decision of the Commissioner.
Respectfully submitted,

9
10 Dated: September 27, 2012
11
12
13

/s/ Tom Weathered
(as authorized via e-mail)
TOM WEATHERED
Attorney for Plaintiff
MELINDA L. HAAG
United States Attorney

14
15 Dated: September 27, 2012
16
17

By s/ Daniel P. Talbert
DANIEL P. TALBERT
Special Assistant U.S. Attorney
Attorneys for Defendant

18

S

ER

H

26

RT

25

27
28
2

R NIA

dward
Judge E

NO

24

_________________________________
EDWARD M. CHEN RDERED
SO O
UNITED IT IS DISTRICT JUDGE
STATE
n

M. Che

FO

23

September 28, 2012
DATED:________________________

LI

22

APPROVED AND SO ORDERED:

RT
U
O

21

S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA

UNIT
ED

20

ORDER

A

19

N

F
D IS T IC T O
R

C