Takiah Mignon Stroman v. Carolyn w Colvin

Filing 19

ORDER by Judge Kandis A. Westmore granting as unopposed 16 Motion for Summary Judgment and Remanding for further administrative proceedings before a different ALJ. (kawlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/3/2015) Modified on 8/3/2015 (kawlc1, COURT STAFF).

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 TAKIAH MIGNON STROMAN, Case No. 15-cv-00633-KAW Plaintiff, 8 v. 9 10 CAROLYN W COLVIN, Defendant. Re: Dkt. No. 16 11 United States District Court Northern District of California ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AS UNOPPOSED AND REMANDING THE CASE FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS 12 13 On June 23, 2015, Plaintiff Takiah Mignon Stroman filed a motion for summary judgment 14 in her social security case. The Government’s opposition was due on or before July 21, 2015. To 15 date, the Government has not filed an opposition despite its communication with Plaintiff’s 16 counsel. (See Dkt. No. 18-1.) 17 Accordingly, the motion for summary judgment is GRANTED as unopposed and the case 18 is REMANDED for further administrative proceedings before a different administrative law judge. 19 See Judge Westmore’s General Standing Order ¶ 22 (“The failure of the opposing party to file a 20 memorandum of points and authorities in opposition to any motion shall constitute consent to the 21 granting of the motion”). Specifically, the further proceedings shall include making a new 22 determination regarding Plaintiff’s residual functional capacity, shall address the weight given to 23 Plaintiff’s treating physicians, and shall address Plaintiff’s credibility prior to determining whether 24 Plaintiff is disabled under the Social Security Act. 25 26 27 28 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: August 3, 2015 __________________________________ KANDIS A. WESTMORE United States Magistrate Judge

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?