Troeppl v. Colvin

Filing 19

ORDER granting 18 Stipulated Motion to Remand - signed by Judge David W. Christel.(SH)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 8 9 10 KERRY M. TROEPPL, 11 Plaintiff, 13 14 ORDER GRANTING STIPULATED MOTION FOR REMAND v. 12 CASE NO. 2:16-CV-01702-DWC NANCY A. BERRYHILL, Acting Commissioner of the Social Security Administration, Defendant. 15 16 17 This Court has jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), Fed. R. Civ. P. 73 and Local 18 Magistrate Judge Rule MJR 13. See also Consent to Proceed before a United States Magistrate 19 Judge, Dkt. 6. Presently before the Court is Defendant’s Stipulated Motion for Remand 20 (“Motion”). Dkt. 18. After reviewing the Motion and the relevant record, the Court orders the 21 following: 22 Defendant’s Motion is granted, and the case is reversed and remanded for further 23 administrative proceedings under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). 24 On remand, the Commissioner shall: ORDER GRANTING STIPULATED MOTION FOR REMAND - 1 1 • Reassess the opinions of treating psychiatrist, Richard Ries, M.D.; examining 2 psychologists Barbara Lui, Ph.D., and R.A. Cline, Psy.D.; and other sources, case 3 manager Natalie Frick, and mental health counselor, Caitlin Cotter; 4 • 5 Reassess Plaintiff’s residual functional capacity in light of the preceding assessments, as well as other steps in the sequential evaluation process, as necessary; 6 • The ALJ will offer Plaintiff an opportunity for a hearing; and 7 • Plaintiff may also present new arguments and further medical evidence, if such 8 9 evidence becomes available. The parties agree that on proper motion the Court should consider Plaintiff’s application 10 for attorney fees and costs under 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d). 11 Dated this 14th day of August, 2017. 12 13 A 14 David W. Christel United States Magistrate Judge 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ORDER GRANTING 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?