Robinson v. Commissioner of Social Security
Filing
13
CONSENT ORDER: REMANDING the # 1 Complaint - Social Security Appeal, and approving the # 12 Stipulation/Consent filed by the parties. Signed by US Magistrate Judge Andrew T. Baxter on 4/9/2018. (jmb)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
-------------------------------------------------------------x
CINDY ROBINSON,
Plaintiff,
Civil Action No.
5:17-CV-01170 (ATB)
v.
NANCY A. BERRYHILL,
Deputy Commissioner for Operations,
performing the duties and functions not reserved
to the Commissioner of Social Security,
CONSENT ORDER OF
REMAND PURSUANT TO
42 U.S.C. § 405(g)
Defendant.
------------------------------------------------------------x
IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by the undersigned attorneys for the
parties in the above-titled action that this case be reversed and remanded to the Commissioner
for further administrative proceedings pursuant to the fourth sentence of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).
AND, the Court having reviewed the record in this matter;
IT IS on this ___ day of April 2018
9th
SO ORDERED.
HON. ANDREW T. BAXTER
United States Magistrate Judge
The undersigned hereby consent to the form and entry of the within order.
GRANT C. JAQUITH
United States Attorney
Northern District of New York
BY: /s/ Padma Ghatage
Padma Ghatage
Special Assistant United States Attorney
Bar Code No. 520461
c/o Social Security Administration
26 Federal Plaza, Room 3904
New York, New York 10278
(212) 264-0981
padma.ghatage@ssa.gov
Attorneys for Defendant
BY: /s/ Karl E. Osterhout
Karl E. Osterhout, Esq.
Pennsylvania State Bar No.: 49658
Osterhout Berger Disability Law
521 Cedar Avenue, Suite 200
Oakmont, PA 15139
(412) 794-8003
Pro Hac Vice
BY: /s/ Paul B. Eaglin
Paul B. Eaglin, Esquire
Bar Number: 519294
P.O. Box 6033
Syracuse, New York 13217
(877) 374-4744
peaglin@eaglinlaw.com
Lead Counsel
Attorneys for Plaintiff
2
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?