McCreary v. Berryhill

Filing 13

ORDER of Remand re parties' 12 Stipulated Motion to Remand. It is hereby ORDERED that the case be REVERSED and REMANDED for further administrative proceedings pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). Signed by U.S. District Judge John C Coughenour. (TH)

Download PDF
THE HONORABLE JOHN C. COUGHENOUR 1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 7 8 9 CARL MCCREARY, 10 11 12 Plaintiff, CASE NO. C17-0615-JCC ORDER OF REMAND v. NANCY A. BERRYHILL, 13 Defendant. 14 15 This matter comes before the Court on a stipulated motion for remand (Dkt. No. 12). 16 Based on the parties’ stipulation, it is hereby ORDERED that the above-captioned case be 17 REVERSED and REMANDED for further administrative proceedings pursuant to sentence four 18 of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). 19 Upon remand, the Appeals Council will direct the ALJ to reevaluate the opinion evidence 20 pursuant to 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1527 and 416.927, reassess the claimant’s symptoms pursuant to 21 Social Security Ruling 16-3p, and reassess the claimant’s residual functional capacity pursuant to 22 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1545 and 416.945 and Social Security Ruling 96-8p. The ALJ will obtain 23 vocational expert evidence and determine whether the vocational expert evidence is consistent 24 with the Dictionary of occupational Titles pursuant to Social Security Ruling 00-4p. The ALJ 25 will then make a de novo determination as to disability, and issue a new decision. Upon proper 26 application, Plaintiff will be entitled to attorney fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 ORDER OF REMAND C17-0615-JCC PAGE - 1 1 2 U.S.C. § 2412 et seq. It is so ORDERED. 3 4 DATED this 19th day of September 2017. A 5 6 7 John C. Coughenour UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 ORDER OF REMAND C17-0615-JCC PAGE - 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?