Bentley v. Colvin
ORDER granting 17 Motion to Remand to Commissioner of Social Security. REVERSED and REMANDED to the Commissioner of Social Security for further administrative proceedings. Signed by Magistrate Judge Jeremiah C. Lynch on 3/17/2017. (APP)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MONTANA
RUPERT A. BENTLEY JR.,
CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Commissioner
of Social Security Administration
Based on the stipulation of the parties, IT IS ORDERED that the
Commissioner’s decision in regard to Plaintiff’s application for disability
insurance benefits under Title II of the Social Security Act be REVERSED and
REMANDED to the Commissioner of Social Security for further administrative
proceedings. On remand, the Administrative Law Judge will (1) consider,
evaluate, and assign appropriate weight to the medical opinions of record,
including but not limited to the opinions of Drs. Vanichkachorn and Butcher; (2)
consider, evaluate, and assign appropriate weight to Ms. Norton’s “other medical
source” opinion; (3) reevaluate the lay witness testimony from Mr. Cattlerin, and
Ms. Bentley; and (4) assess Plaintiff’s symptom testimony under SSR 16-3p. If
applicable, the ALJ should weigh any additional limitations the claimant alleged
in the May 2015 hearing and supplement the record to include the transcript from
the May 2015 hearing, if possible.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk will enter judgment pursuant to
The ALJ and Plaintiff should be permitted to raise and pursue additional
issues, augmenting the record as necessary to fully and fairly address such issues.
This remand should be made pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), and
Plaintiff should be entitled to reasonable attorney fees and costs, pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 2412(d), upon proper request to this Court.
DATED this 17th day of March, 2017.
Jeremiah C. Lynch
United States Magistrate 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?