Anderson v. Colvin

Filing 24

ORDER granting 23 Motion to Remand for Further Administrative Proceedings. The Clerk is directed to enter a judgment in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 58, consistent with the United States Supreme Court's decision in Shalala v. Schaefer, 509 U.S. 292, 296-302 (1993) by Judge John L. Kane on 03/26/14.(jhawk, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 13-cv-2315-AP
DIANA I. ANDERSON,
Plaintiff,
v.
CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting Commissioner of Social Security,
Defendant.
________________________________________________________________________
ORDER
________________________________________________________________________
Defendant’s Unopposed Motion to Remand for Further Administrative
Proceedings (doc. #23), filed March 26, 2014, is GRANTED.
This civil action is remanded to Defendant for additional administrative
proceedings pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). The Clerk is directed to
enter a judgment in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 58, consistent with the United States
Supreme Court's decision in Shalala v. Schaefer, 509 U.S. 292, 296-302 (1993).
Upon remand, the Appeals Council will remand the matter to an Administrative
Law Judge (ALJ) to afford Plaintiff an opportunity to attend a supplemental hearing and
to submit additional evidence. Upon completion of the record, the Administrative Law
Judge will further consider and make findings with rationale regarding Plaintiff’s residual
functional capacity; obtain supplemental vocational expert evidence; and issue a new
decision for the period from September 20, 2002, until March 23, 2009.
-1-

Upon remand, Plaintiff may elect to have continued benefits pursuant to 20 C.F.R.
s. 416.996, Program Operations Manual System (POMS) DI 12027.065A, and Hearings,
Appeals and Litigation Law Manual (HALLEX) I-5-3-4. Pursuant to
POMS DI 12027.060A and DI 12.067.065A, if Plaintiff previously elected continued
benefits at a prior ALJ level, continued benefits will be reinstated without a new election
statement retroactive to the first month of non-payment resulting from a vacated ALJ
decision. Accordingly, upon remand, the Appeals Council will notify Plaintiff’s
servicing field office of this order. The servicing field office will determine the correct
payment amount and issue retroactive payment of continued service benefits to which
Plaintiff qualifies, retroactive to the to the month terminated, as provide for in 20 C.F.R.
§ 416.996(e) and POMS DI 12027.065C.2.c.
Dated: March 26, 2014
BY THE COURT:

s/John L. Kane___________________
JOHN L. KANE, SENIOR JUDGE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

-2-