Tecle v. Colvin

Filing 20

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 19 Stipulated MOTION to Remand filed by Carolyn W Colvin; signed by Magistrate Judge David W. Christel. Noting Date 12/6/2016. (CMG)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 8 9 10 FASIL TECLE, 11 12 13 Plaintiff, v. CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, CASE NO. 2:16-CV-00908-JLR-DWC ORDER ON DEFENDANT’S STIPULATED MOTION FOR REMAND 14 Defendant. 15 16 The District Court has referred this action, filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), to United 17 States Magistrate Judge David W. Christel. Presently before the Court is Defendant’s Stipulated 18 Motion for Remand. Dkt. 19. After reviewing Defendant’s Stipulated Motion and the relevant 19 record, the Court recommends the following: 20 Defendant’s Motion be granted, and the case be reversed and remanded for further 21 administrative proceedings under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). 22 On remand, the Court recommends the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) hold a de novo 23 hearing and issue a new decision. The Court also recommends the ALJ’s review include but not 24 be limited to: ORDER ON DEFENDANT’S STIPULATED MOTION FOR REMAND - 1 1 • 2 Obtaining vocational expert testimony to determine whether Plaintiff’s assessed limitations allow for the performance of other work in the national economy; 3 • 4 The parties agree that on proper motion the Court should consider Plaintiff’s application Recommencing the five-step sequential evaluation if the record is supplemented. 5 for costs and attorney fees under 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d) and 42 U.S.C. § 406(b). 6 Given the facts and the parties’ stipulation, the Court recommends the District Judge 7 immediately approve this Report and Recommendation. 8 Dated this 6th day of December, 2016. A 9 10 David W. Christel United States Magistrate Judge 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ORDER ON DEFENDANT’S STIPULATED MOTION FOR REMAND - 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?