Edmondson v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 32

OPINION AND ORDER re 31 Unopposed Motion for Relief from Judgment by Dft Commissioner of Social Security. Pursuant to Seventh Circuit Rule 57, this Court indicates that it is inclined to grant the motion and vacate the 6/16/2017 judgment, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.Pro. 60(b)(6), and enter judgment reversing the Commissioner's decision with remand for further administrative proceedings. Signed by Judge William C Lee on 2/23/2018. (cc: USCA)(lns)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
FORT WAYNE DIVISION
AMY L. EDMONDSON,

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Plaintiff,
v.
NANCY A. BERRYHILL,
ACTING COMMISSIONER OF
SOCIAL SECURITY,
Defendant.

CIVIL NO. 1:16cv142

OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the court on the Commissioner’s “Unopposed Motion for Relief From
Judgment”, filed on February 9, 2018.
The background facts are as follows. On May 3, 2016, Plaintiff sought judicial
review of the Commissioner’s final decision pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). On June 16, 2017,
following briefing by the parties, the Court entered judgment for the Commissioner. On August
15, 2017, Plaintiff filed a timely notice of appeal (7th Cir. No. 17-2689).
Upon further consideration, the Commissioner has determined that the June 16, 2017
judgment should be vacated and that this matter should be remanded to the Social Security
Administration for further administrative proceedings pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. §
405(g). On remand, the Commissioner will reevaluate the medical opinions in the record, including
the opinions of Dr. Booth, Dr. Rutten, and Dr. Gadiraju; reevaluate Plaintiff’s residual functional
capacity; if necessary, obtain additional vocational expert evidence; and issue a new decision.
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(6) allows the Court to relieve a party from a final
order for “any . . . reason justifying relief . . . .” Because the Commissioner now agrees that the

case should be reversed with remand for further administrative proceedings, the Commissioner
submits that Rule 60(b)(6) relief from the Court’s June 16, 2017, judgment is appropriate.
Due to the pending appeal, this Court lacks jurisdiction to grant Rule 60(b) relief at this
time. Seventh Circuit Rule 57, however, states that “[a] party who during the pendency of an
appeal has filed a motion under Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(a) or 60(b) . . . should request the district court
to indicate whether it is inclined to grant the motion. If the district court so indicates, this court will
remand the case for the purpose of modifying the judgment.” The pending appeal does not deprive
this court of jurisdiction to consider the motion for an indicative ruling. Brown v. United States,
976 F.2d 1104, 1110 (7th Cir. 1992).
The Commissioner states that Plaintiff has been advised of, and agrees with, the nature and
substance of this motion. Plaintiff has not filed any response to the motion indicating that she does
not agree.
Therefore, pursuant to Seventh Circuit Rule 57, this court indicates that it is inclined to
grant the motion and vacate the June 16, 2017 judgment, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.Pro. 60(b)(6), and
enter judgment reversing the Commissioner’s decision with remand for further administrative
proceedings.
SO ORDERED.

Entered: February 23, 2018.

s/ William C. Lee
William C. Lee, Judge
United States District Court

2