Hughes v. Colvin

Filing 16

ORDER granting 15 Motion to Remand by Judge Karen L Strombom. This case is reversed and remanded pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).(MET)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON TACOMA DIVISION 8 9 10 DONNA KAY HUGHES, 11 Plaintiff, 12 vs. Civil No. 3:14-CV-05924-KLS 13 ORDER ON REMAND CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, 14 Defendant. 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Based on the stipulation of the parties, it is hereby ORDERED that the above-captioned case be reversed and remanded pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for further administrative proceedings, including, but not limited to, the following actions: the administrative law judge (the ALJ) will further evaluate the severity of Plaintiff’s mental impairments; the ALJ will reevaluate the opinions of Dr. Dixon (Tr. 327-331), Dr. Clifford (Tr. 85-86, 89-90), and Dr. Gollogly (Tr. 98-99, 102-103); the ALJ will reevaluate Plaintiff’s subjective complaints; the ALJ will reassess Plaintiff’s residual functional capacity; the ALJ will further determine whether Plaintiff can perform the physical and mental demands of her past relevant work; and, if warranted, the ALJ will obtain evidence from a vocational expert to clarify 24 Page 1 ORDER - [3:14-CV-05924-KLS] 1 the effect of the assessed limitations on the occupational base at step five. 2 This case is reversed and remanded pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). 3 4 DATED this 16th day of April, 2015. 5 A 6 Karen L. Strombom United States Magistrate Judge 7 8 9 10 Presented by: 11 s/ Daphne Banay DAPHNE BANAY Special Assistant U.S. Attorney Office of the General Counsel Social Security Administration 701 Fifth Avenue, Suite 2900 M/S 221A Seattle, WA 98104-7075 Telephone: (206) 615-2113 Fax: (206) 615-2531 daphne.banay@ssa.gov 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Page 2 ORDER - [3:14-CV-05924-KLS]

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?