Hanson v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 19

ORDER - The decision of the Administrative Law Judge is reversed, and this case is remanded to the Commissioner for further consideration pursuant to sentence four of 42 USC Section 405(g). Signed by Senior Judge Donald E OBrien on 2/19/15. (djs)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA
WESTERN DIVISION
VICKIE LYNN HANSON,
Plaintiff,

No. 14-CV-4061-DEO

vs.
CAROLYN W. COLVIN,
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL
SECURITY,

ORDER

Defendant.
____________________
I.

ANALYSIS
The above captioned case arises out of a Social Security

Complaint filed by Ms. Hanson on July 14, 2014.

Docket No. 3.

On January 20, 2015, the Defendant filed a Motion to
Remand, Docket No. 13. In the Motion to Remand, the Defendant
admits certain deficiencies in the record and requests the
Court remand the case.

Specifically, the Defendant states:

[a]fter
careful
review
of
the
above-captioned
case
agency
counsel
requested
that
the
Appeals
Council
reconsider the Commissioner’s decision.
Upon review, the Appeals Council determined
that remand was appropriate for further
consideration of plaintiff’s claim.
Docket No. 13, p. 3.

The Plaintiff resists remanding, arguing instead that the
Court should consider the case on the merits and award Ms.
Hanson benefits.

Docket No. 14.

The Court held a hearing on this matter on February 6,
2015. After listening to the parties’ arguments, the Court is
persuaded that remand is appropriate.

As stated in the

Defendant’s brief, it is clear that the current record lacks
vital information necessary to reach a proper determination of
Ms. Hanson’s disability claim.

For that reason, upon remand,

the Appeals Council will vacate the ALJ’s decision and remand
this case to an ALJ.

The ALJ will provide Ms. Hanson an

opportunity to update the medical records; further evaluate
the mental impairments pursuant to the special technique for
evaluating mental impairments set forth by 20 C.F.R. §§
404.1520a and 416.920a; further evaluate the medical opinion
evidence and the claimant’s subjective complaints; reassess
the

claimant’s

RFC;

obtain

supplemental

evidence

for

a

vocational expert at steps four, and if warranted, step five;
offer the claimant an opportunity for another hearing; and
take

any

further

action

necessary

administrative record.
2

to

complete

the

II.

CONCLUSION
For the reasons set out above, the decision of the

Administrative
remanded

to

Law

the

Judge

is

reversed,

Commissioner

for

and

this

further

case

is

consideration

pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).

1

If Plaintiff wishes to request an award of attorney's
fees and costs under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA) 28
U.S.C. § 2412, an application may be filed up until 30 days
after the judgment becomes "not appealable" i.e., 30 days
after the 60–day time for appeal has ended.
Schaefer,

509

U.S.

292,

296

(1993);

See Shalala v.
28

U.S.C.

§§

2412(d)(1)(B),(d)(2)(G).
IT IS SO ORDERED this 19th day of February, 2015.

__________________________________
Donald E. O’Brien, Senior Judge
United States District Court
Northern District of Iowa

1

During the hearing, Plaintiff’s counsel expressed
concern about potentially having to re-litigate issues in this
case if Ms. Hanson is again denied benefits. If Ms. Hanson is
again denied benefits, and chooses to appeal that Order, Ms.
Hanson need only reference the above captioned case number as
a ‘related case’ when filing her Complaint, and the case
should be assigned to this Court by the Clerk of Court’s
Office.
3