Anderson v. Colvin

Filing 12

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 11 Report and Recommendations regarding 10 Motion to Remand to Agency filed by Carolyn W. Colvin. This action is REVERSED and REMANDED to the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration. Signed by Judge Michael H. Schneider on 9/4/14. (bas, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
OF THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
TEXARKANA DIVISION
JERRY G. ANDERSON
Plaintiff
V.
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL
SECURITY ADMINISTRATION
Defendant

§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§

No. 5:13CV127

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
The above-entitled and numbered civil action was heretofore referred to United States
Magistrate Judge Caroline M. Craven pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636. The Report of the Magistrate
Judge which contains her proposed findings of fact and recommendations for the disposition of such
action has been presented for consideration. No objections to the Report and Recommendation were
filed. The Court is of the opinion that the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge are
correct. Therefore, the Court hereby adopts the Report of the United States Magistrate Judge as the
findings and conclusions of this Court. Accordingly, it is hereby
ORDERED that Defendant’s Unopposed Motion for Remand (Dkt. No. 10) is hereby
GRANTED. It is further
ORDERED that Plaintiff’s above-entitled and numbered civil action is REVERSED and
REMANDED under the fourth sentence of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), to the
Commissioner of the Social Security Administration for further administrative proceedings before
an Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”). It is further
ORDERED that on remand an ALJ will update the treatment evidence on the claimant’s
medical conditions; if warranted, obtain evidence from a medical expert to clarify the nature and

severity of the claimant’s impairments; and further evaluate whether the claimant has a severe
impairment or combination of impairments at step two under the standard set forth in Stone v.
Heckler, 752 F.2d 1099 (5th Cir. 1985). Additionally, the ALJ will expressly evaluate the treating,
examining, and non-examining medical source opinions in the record, and explain the reasons for
the weight he gives to their opinion evidence. If warranted, the ALJ shall consider the claimant’s
residual functional capacity on the updated record, citing specific evidence in support of the assessed
limitations; and, if warranted, consider whether the claimant has past relevant work he could perform
.
with the limitations established by the evidence. Finally, the ALJ, as appropriate, shall secure
supplemental evidence from a vocational expert to clarify the effect of the assessed limitations on
the claimant’s occupational base. It is further
ORDERED that all motions not previously ruled on are DENIED, and the referral order is
VACATED.
It is SO ORDERED.
SIGNED this 4th day of September, 2014.

____________________________________
MICHAEL H. SCHNEIDER
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2