Davis v. Commissioner of the Social Security Administration

Filing 53

Order to Vacate 48 Order Ruling on Report and Recommendation. The court hereby grants the plaintiff's motion to reconsider and vacates the court's order of September 27, 2012. The court rejects the recommendati on of the Magistrate Judge in this case and determines that a remand in accordance with the terms of this order is appropriate. The court hereby remands this action to the Commissioner under Sentence Four of § 205(g) of the Social Security Act. Signed by Honorable Joseph F Anderson, Jr on 11/13/2012. (gnan )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA

Tobby Davis,
Plaintiff,
vs.

Michael J. Astrue, Commissioner of Social
Security,
Defendant.
____________________________________

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

C/A: 5:11-405-JFA-KDW

ORDER

In an order filed September 27, 2012, this court overruled the objections to the
Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation, and affirmed the decision of the
Commissioner denying social security disability benefits in this case. Plaintiff timely moved
under Rule 59(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to alter or amend the judgment, and
the defendant has responded to the motion.
After reviewing the submissions of the parties, and reviewing the recent decision of
the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in Bird v. Commissioner, ___ F.3d
____ (4th Cir. 2012), the court has become persuaded that its initial decision to affirm the
ALJ’s denial of benefits was improvidently granted. The record contains evidence of
interstitial cystitis that was produced after the last date insured but, when considered with
evidence produced before the last date insured, there might exist objective evidence to
support the treating doctor’s conclusion that claimant suffered significant limitations of

1

impairment from the interstitial cystitis before the last date insured. Moreover, case law
indicates that a treating physician’s diagnosis after the last date insured, of a condition which
existed before the last date insured, must be given the same deference as a diagnosis made
at any other time.
For these reasons, the court hereby grants the plaintiff’s motion to reconsider and
vacates the court’s order of September 27, 2012. The court rejects the recommendation of
the Magistrate Judge in this case and determines that a remand in accordance with the terms
of this order is appropriate. The court hereby remands this action to the Commissioner under
Sentence Four of § 205(g) of the Social Security Act, so that the ALJ may properly evaluate
claimant’s interstitial cystitis problem in accordance with this order.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

November 13, 2012
Columbia, South Carolina

Joseph F. Anderson, Jr.
United States District Judge

2