Heddlesten v. Colvin

Filing 28

JUDGMENT IN A CIVIL ACTION in favor of Carolyn W Colvin against Rolande Heddlesten. (PH, Case Administrator)

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
MARK HAVILAND,

6
7
8

Plaintiff,
v.

9
10

CAROLYN W. COLVIN,
Commissioner of Social Security,

No. 2:15-CV-0299-JTR
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
TO GRANT STIPULATED MOTION
FOR REMAND PURSUANT TO
SENTENCE FOUR OF 42 U.S.C. §
405(g)

11
12

Defendant.

13
14

BEFORE THE COURT is the parties’ stipulated motion to remand the

15

above-captioned matter to the Commissioner for additional administrative

16

proceedings pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). ECF No. 17.

17

Attorney Tom Grant Cordell represents Plaintiff; Special Assistant United States

18

Attorney Jennifer Ann Kenney represents Defendant. The parties have not

19

consented to proceed before a magistrate judge in this case. After considering the

20

file and proposed order, IT IS RECOMMENDED:

21

The parties’ Stipulation for Voluntary Remand, ECF No. 17, be

22

GRANTED and the above-captioned case be REVERSED and REMANDED to

23

the Commissioner of Social Security for further administrative proceedings

24

pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).

25

On remand, the administrative law judge (ALJ) shall hold a new hearing,

26

update the evidence of record, and issue a new decision. The ALJ shall:

27

(1) provide specific reasoning for the weight accorded to all medical opinion

28

evidence of record, in particular the medical opinions of Drs. Drenguis and Duris;
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION . . . - 1

1

(2) reconsider all impairments and functional limitations noted of record, with

2

specific attention given to Plaintiff’s left shoulder limitations; (3) reevaluate the

3

step three findings, including Listing 12.04, with the assistance of a medical

4

expert; (4) reassess Plaintiff’s residual functional capacity (RFC); (5) reexamine

5

Plaintiff’s statements and testimony in accordance with SSR 16-3p; and (6) with

6

the assistance of a vocational expert, and ensuring the vocational expert is provided

7

a hypothetical that is consistent with the RFC ultimately determined, reassess steps

8

four and five of the sequential evaluation process to address whether Plaintiff is

9

able to return to his past relevant work or to make a vocational adjustment to other

10
11
12
13

work existing in significant numbers in the national economy.
The ALJ may take any other actions necessary to develop the record, and
Plaintiff may submit additional evidence and present additional argument.
IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED Judgment be entered for

14

PLAINTIFF, Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. 13, be

15

STRICKEN AS MOOT, and any application for attorney fees be filed by separate

16

motion.

17
18

OBJECTIONS
Any party may object to a magistrate judge’s proposed findings,

19

recommendations or report within fourteen (14) days following service with a copy

20

thereof. Such party shall file written objections with the Clerk of the Court,

21

specifically identifying the portions to which objection is being made, and the basis

22

therefor. Any response to the objection shall be filed within fourteen (14) days

23

after receipt of the objection. Attention is directed to FED. R. CIV. P. 6(d), which

24

adds additional time after certain kinds of service.

25

A district judge will make a de novo determination of those portions to

26

which objection is made and may accept, reject, or modify the magistrate judge’s

27

determination. The judge need not conduct a new hearing or hear arguments and

28

may consider the magistrate judge’s record and make an independent
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION . . . - 2

1

determination thereon. The judge may, but is not required to, accept or consider

2

additional evidence, or may recommit the matter to the magistrate judge with

3

instructions. United States v. Howell, 231 F.3d 615, 621 (9th Cir. 2000); 28 U.S.C.

4

§ 636(b)(1)(B) and (C), FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b)(3); LMR 4, Local Rules for the

5

Eastern District of Washington.

6
7
8
9
10
11

A magistrate judge’s recommendation cannot be appealed to a court of
appeals; only the district judge’s order or judgment can be appealed.
IT IS SO RECOMMENDED. The Clerk of Court is directed to enter this
report and recommendation and forward copies to counsel and the assigned district
court judge.
DATED September 20, 2016.

12
13
14

_____________________________________
JOHN T. RODGERS
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION . . . - 3