Montoya v. Colvin

Filing 16

ORDER Granting 15 Defendant's Unopposed Motion for Remand,seeking entry of judgment and a remand for further administrative proceedings under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). The final decision of the agency is REVERSED and the cas e REMANDED for further 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), by Judge Wiley Y. Daniel on 1/13/2016.(evana, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 15-cv-02395-WYD
SHIRLEY MONTOYA,
Plaintiff,
v.
CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting Commissioner of Social Security,
Defendant.

ORDER
Daniel, J.
Defendant's Unopposed Motion for Remand (ECF No. 15), seeking entry of
judgment and a remand for further administrative proceedings under sentence four of
42 U.S.C. § 405(g), is GRANTED. The final decision of the agency is REVERSED and
the case REMANDED for further administrative proceedings pursuant to sentence four
of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). On remand, the Appeals Council will instruct the administrative
law judge (“ALJ”) to allow Plaintiff the opportunity for a new hearing and to submit new
relevant medical evidence. The ALJ will evaluate all opinion evidence of record and will
explain the weight provided to each opinion with citations to record evidence that
supports the weight assigned. The ALJ will re-evaluate Plaintiff’s impairments at step
three of the sequential evaluation process and support the step three findings with
citations to the record. The ALJ will also obtain supplemental vocational expert
evidence as necessary to determine whether Plaintiff has any skills from past relevant
work that would transfer to other work. The ALJ will proceed through the sequential

evaluation process as necessary to issue a de novo decision.
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).

Dated: January 13, 2016
BY THE COURT:

/s/ Wiley Y. Daniel
WILEY Y. DANIEL,
SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE