Mayhew v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 38

ORDER GRANTING 37 EX PARTE MOTION FOR A VOLUNTARY REMAND PURSUANT TO SENTENCE FOUR OF 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). Signed by Judge Beth Labson Freeman on 2/20/2015. (blflc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/20/2015)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 MELINDA HAAG United States Attorney DONNA L. CALVERT Regional Chief Counsel, Region IX Social Security Administration JEFFREY CHEN, CSBN 260516 Special Assistant United States Attorney Social Security Administration 160 Spear Street, Suite 800 San Francisco, CA 94105 Telephone: (415) 977-8939 Facsimile: (415) 744-0134 Email: Jeffrey.Chen@ssa.gov Attorneys for Defendant 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 11 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 12 SAN JOSE DIVISION 13 14 JOHN MAYHEW, 15 Plaintiff, 16 v. 17 18 19 CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant. 20 21 22 23 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. 5:13-cv-04521-BLF EX PARTE MOTION FOR A VOLUNTARY REMAND PURUSANT TO SENTENCE FOUR OF 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) Defendant hereby moves, through her undersigned attorneys, and with the approval of the Court, to a voluntary remand of this case pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). Upon further examination of the record, it appears that there is an inconsistency between 24 the ALJ’s overpayment calculations as compared with the agency’s payment records. Upon 25 remand, the ALJ shall re-calculate Plaintiff’s overpayment, if any, for the period beginning in 26 1995, re-determine Plaintiff’s total overpayment, and issue a new administrative decision. 27 28 Motion for Sentence 4 Remand 1 1 Respectfully submitted, 2 3 Date: February 3, 2015 MELINDA HAAG United States Attorney 4 By: 5 6 /s/ Jeffrey Chen JEFFREY CHEN Special Assistant United States Attorney Attorneys for Defendant 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 ORDER 15 16 17 APPROVED AND SO ORDERED: DATED: HONORABLE BETH L. FREEMAN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Motion for Sentence 4 Remand 2

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?