Starofsky v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 24

Amended ORDER re Motion to Remand. Accordingly, the Commissioner's decision in this matter is REVERSED and the case is REMANDED to the Commissioner for a new hearing pursuant to the fourth sentence of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). On August 13, 2015, the Clerk properly entered Judgment in favor of the Plaintiff and against the Defendant. This matter remains terminated. Entered by Magistrate Judge Jonathan E. Hawley on 6/15/2016. (KZ, ilcd)

E-FILED

Wednesday, 15 June, 2016 02:42:54 PM
Clerk, U.S. District Court, ILCD

IN THE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
ROCK ISLAND DIVISION
APRIL MARIE STAROFSKY,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No. 4:14-cv-04081-JEH

COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL
SECURITY,
Defendant.
Amended Order
This matter is now before the Court on the parties’ Joint Motion for
Remand for Further Proceedings Pursuant to Sentence Four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g)
(Doc. 17). In their Motion, the parties jointly request that the Court reverse this
case and remand for further proceedings pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. §
405(g), which authorizes the Court “to enter, upon the pleadings and transcript
of the record, a judgment affirming, modifying, or reversing the decision of the
Commissioner of Social Security, with or without remanding the cause for a
rehearing.” 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). The parties stipulate that upon remand, the ALJ
will give the Plaintiff the opportunity for a hearing; reevaluate the Plaintiff’s
impairments, singly and in combination, at step three of the sequential
evaluation process under Listing 1.00 and determine whether her combined
impairments, including her obesity, meet or medically equal the listing; address
the Plaintiff’s obesity and whether it impacts her ability to function, and, if so,
how; reassess the Plaintiff’s residual functional capacity; if necessary, obtain
medical expert evidence to evaluate the severity of the Plaintiff’s impairments
and whether they meet or equal a listing in the listing of impairments; further
1

evaluate the Plaintiff’s allegations of illiteracy and her education level and
provide rationale to support the conclusions; and, if necessary, obtain
supplemental vocational expert testimony to assist in determining what jobs
exist in significant numbers for the Plaintiff in the national economy. The parties
agree that the ALJ will then issue a new decision, after reevaluating the evidence,
regarding the disability application.
The Court finds the request for remand appropriate and so the Motion to
Remand (Doc. 17) is GRANTED. Accordingly, the Commissioner’s decision in
this matter is REVERSED and the case is REMANDED to the Commissioner for a
new hearing pursuant to the fourth sentence of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). On August 13,
2015, the Clerk properly entered Judgment in favor of the Plaintiff and against
the Defendant. This matter remains terminated.
It is so ordered.
Entered on June 15, 2016.

s/Jonathan E. Hawley
U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE

2