Burnside v. Berryhill
Filing
24
ORDER granting Defendant's 20 Motion to Reopen Case for Entry of Judgment; Case reopened for the purpose of entering Judgment in favor of Defendant, after which the matter will again be closed. Signed by Judge Ricardo S Martinez. (SWT)
1
2
3
4
5
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE
6
7
LARRY JAMES BURNSIDE,
8
Plaintiff,
v.
9
10
NANCY A. BERRYHILL, Acting
Commissioner of Social Security,
CASE NO. C12-1739RSM
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO
REOPEN
11
Defendant.
12
13
THIS MATTER comes before the Court on Defendant’s Motion to Reopen this case for
14 entry of Judgment in Defendant’s favor. Dkt. #20. The Commissioner notes that this matter was
15 initially remanded pursuant to sentence six of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) on January 23, 2013. Dkt. #18.
16 However, on remand, Plaintiff and his attorney signed a letter indicating that Plaintiff did not wish
17 to pursue the claim and requesting to withdraw the request for hearing.
AR 597.
The
18 Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) dismissed the request for a hearing on March 26, 2015. AR 59319 96. The Appeals Council issued a decision on November 19, 2015, adopting the findings and
20 conclusion of the ALJ decision, dated February 19, 2010.
AR 591.
Accordingly, the
21 Commissioner moves the Court to enter Judgment in favor of Defendant pursuant to sentence four
22 of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), affirming the Appeals Council’s November 19, 2015, decision, because
23 Plaintiff has withdrawn his administrative claim. Plaintiff responds that he does not oppose this
24 motion. Dkt. #23.
ORDER - 1
1
Accordingly, the Court hereby ORDERS:
2
1. Defendant’s Motion to Reopen (Dkt. #20) is GRANTED.
3
2. This case is reopened for the purpose of entering Judgment in favor of Defendant, after
4
5
which the matter will again be closed.
DATED this 12th day of April, 2017.
6
7
8
A
9
RICARDO S. MARTINEZ
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
ORDER - 2
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?