Danner v. Commissioner Social Security Administration
Filing
19
ORDER: Granting Stipulated Motion to Remand 18 . Signed on 3/31/2021 by Judge Michael J. McShane. (cp)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF OREGON
LEEANN M. DANNER,
Civil No. 6:20-cv-00530-MC
Plaintiff,
ORDER FOR REMAND
v.
COMMISSIONER, SOCIAL SECURITY
ADMINISTRATION
Defendant.
Based on the stipulation of the parties, it is hereby ORDERED that the above-captioned
case be REVERSED and REMANDED for further administrative proceedings pursuant to
sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). On remand, the Appeals Council will instruct the
administrative law judge to take any steps necessary to fully develop the administrative record,
and to provide Plaintiff an opportunity for a new hearing and to submit additional evidence in
support of her claim. Further, the Council will direct the ALJ to reevaluate the opinion evidence
and reassess Plaintiff’s residual functional capacity. If warranted, the ALJ will obtain
supplemental vocational evidence or otherwise comply with Social Security Ruling 00-4p to
resolve all apparent conflicts and articulate the resolution of any apparent conflicts between the
jobs identified and the Dictionary of Occupational Titles.
Upon proper presentation, the Court will consider whether reasonable attorney fees,
costs, and expenses should be awarded pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. §
2412(d).
IT IS SO ORDERED this _________ day of __________________ 2021.
31st
March
s/Michael J. McShane
____________________________________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Page 1
ORDER - [6:20-CV-00530-MC]
Submitted by:
SCOTT ERIK ASPHAUG, OSB #833674
United States Attorney
RENATA GOWIE, OSB #175273
Civil Division Chief
s/ Lisa Goldoftas
LISA GOLDOFTAS
Special Assistant United States Attorney
of Attorneys for Defendant
(206) 615-3858
Page 2
ORDER - [6:20-CV-00530-MC]
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?