Silva v. Colvin

Filing 21

ORDER FOR REMAND AND JUDGMENT Granting 20 Defendants Unopposed Motion for Remand. That this matter is remanded to the Commissioner for further administrative proceedings pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g); That judgment sha ll enter in favor of plaintiff against defendant in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 58 and consistent with the decision of the United States Supreme Court in Shalala v. Schaefer, 509 U.S. 292, 296-302, 113 S.Ct. 2625, 2628-32, 125 L.Ed.2d 239 (1993); and 5. That plaintiff is awarded her costs to be taxed by the clerk of the court pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(d)(1) and D.C.COLO.LCivR 54.1 and 28 U.S.C. § 2412(a)(1), by Judge Robert E. Blackburn on 1/7/2016.(evana, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Judge Robert E. Blackburn
Civil Action No. 15-cv-01762-REB
KAREN LEE SILVA,
Plaintiff,
v.
CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting Commissioner of Social Security,
Defendant.

ORDER FOR REMAND AND JUDGMENT
Blackburn, J.
The matter before me is Defendant’s Unopposed Motion for Remand [#20],1
filed January 6, 2016. By this motion, defendant requests that the court remand this
matter for further administrative proceedings under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).
Having reviewed the motion and the file, I find and conclude that the motion is welltaken and should be granted.
THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED as follows:
1. That Defendant’s Unopposed Motion for Remand [#20], filed January 6,
2016, is granted,
2. That the conclusion of the Commissioner through the Administrative Law
Judge that plaintiff was not disabled is reversed;

1

“[#20]” is an example of the convention I use to identify the docket number assigned to a
specific paper by the court’s case management and electronic case filing system (CM/ECF). I use this
convention throughout this order.

3. That this matter is remanded to the Commissioner for further administrative
proceedings pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g);
4. That judgment shall enter in favor of plaintiff against defendant in accordance
with Fed. R. Civ. P. 58 and consistent with the decision of the United States Supreme
Court in Shalala v. Schaefer, 509 U.S. 292, 296-302, 113 S.Ct. 2625, 2628-32, 125
L.Ed.2d 239 (1993); and
5. That plaintiff is awarded her costs to be taxed by the clerk of the court
pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(d)(1) and D.C.COLO.LCivR 54.1 and 28 U.S.C.
§ 2412(a)(1).
Dated January 7, 2016, at Denver, Colorado.
BY THE COURT:

2