Arellanes v. Colvin

Filing 16

ORDER GRANTING 13 Motion to Remand to Social Security Administration Signed by Judge Robert F. Castaneda. (dl1)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
EL PASO DIVISION
LOUIS ARELLANES,
Plaintiff,
v.
CAROLYN W. COLVIN, ACTING
COMMISSIONER OF THE SOCIAL
SECURITY ADMINISTRATION
Defendant.

§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§

EP-14-CV-119-KC-RFC

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO REVERSE AND REMAND
This is a civil action seeking judicial review of an administrative decision of the
Commissioner of the Social Security Administration denying Plaintiff’s application for disability
benefits under Titles II or XVI of the Social Security Act. 42 U.S.C. § 423(d), 1382c. Defendant
has filed an unopposed motion to remand pursuant to sentence six of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), upon which
this Court’s jurisdiction is predicated. (Doc. 13)
Section 405(g) permits the Court to remand a case to the Commissioner for further
administrative action. The sixth sentence provides:
The court may, on motion of the Commissioner of Social Security made for good
cause shown before the Commissioner files the Commissioner’s answer, remand the
case to the Commissioner of Social Security for further action by the Commissioner
of Social Security, and it may at any time order additional evidence to be taken
before the Commissioner of Social Security, but only upon a showing that there is
new evidence which is material and that there is good cause for the failure to
incorporate such evidence into the record in a prior proceeding.
42 U.S.C. § 405(g). The Court may remand a matter where there is new evidence not available at

1

the time of the ALJ’s decision, and obtaining such information may change the determination of
plaintiff’s application.
In this case, Plaintiff submitted additional evidence to the Agency, treatment notes from
Plaintiff’s chiropractor, which neither the ALJ nor the Appeals Council had considered. The Agency
believes this evidence constitutes new and material evidence and the Appeals Council has concluded
that the issues in the case require further administrative development. (Doc. 13:2) The Appeals
Council will instruct the ALJ to consider the additional evidence submitted, reconsider the severity
of Plaintiff’s left shoulder impairment, reevaluate Plaintiff’s subjective complaints, reassess
Plaintiff’s maximum residual functional capacity, offer Plaintiff an opportunity for another hearing,
and issue a new decision. Id.
After reviewing the Defendant’s motion in the instant case, and noting that Plaintiff’s
attorney, Jacqueline F. Nel, does not oppose the motion, the Court finds that the motion is
meritorious and should be granted.
It is therefore ORDERED that the Commissioner’s decision denying benefits is
REVERSED and the cause REMANDED to the Commissioner for further administrative action.
SIGNED and ENTERED on June 24, 2014.

_____________________________________
ROBERT F. CASTANEDA
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

2