MacFadgen v. Colvin

Filing 23

Judge Indira Talwani: ORDER entered. This case is ORDERED REMANDED to Social Security Administration for further administrative proceedings. This Court hereby REVERSES the Commissioner's decision under sentence four of 42 U.S.c. § 405(g) with a remand of the cause to the Commissioner for further proceedings. (Bartlett, Timothy)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS SHERYL ANN MACFADGEN, Plaintiff, v. CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No.l:14-CV-13232-IT Pursuant to the power of this Court to enter a judgment affirming, modifying or reversing the Commissioner's decision with remand in Social Security actions under sentence four of section 205(g) of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.c. § 405(g), and in light of the Commissioner's request to remand this action for further administrative proceedings by the Social Security Administration, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this case be remanded to Social Security Administration for further administrative proceedings. The Social Security Administration's Appeals Council will remand the case and instruct the Administrative Law Judge to reconsider the opinion of Ms. McGrath, reevaluate plaintiff's residual functional capacity, reevaluate plaintiff's ability to perform her past work or other work in the national economy, and obtain supplemental vocational expert evidence. Therefore, this court hereby reverses the Commissioner's decision under sentence four of 42 U.S.c. § 405(g) with a remand of the cause to the Commissioner for further proceedings. See Shalala v. Schaefer, 509 U.S. 292 (1993); Melkonyan v. Sullivan, 501 U.S. 89 (1991). The clerk of the court will enter a separate judgment pursuant to Rule 58 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. SO ORDERED this 1/t'<day of ;ttI/JI't. vi-, ,2015. Indira Talwani United States District Judge

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?