Jones v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 15

ORDER signed by Hon. S. Kate Vaughan, re: the parties' Stipulated 14 Motion to Remand. (TF)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON TACOMA DIVISION 8 9 10 MINDEE DEANN JONES, 12 Plaintiff, 13 [PROPOSED] ORDER vs. 14 15 Case No. C23-5976-SKV COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, 16 Defendant. 17 Pursuant to the parties’ stipulated motion, the Court hereby ORDERS that this matter is 18 remanded to the Commissioner under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) (fourth sentence), for further 19 administrative proceedings. On remand, the administrative law judge will reevaluate the medical 20 opinion evidence, including the prior administrative medical findings from the State agency 21 psychological consultants; reevaluate the residual functional capacity; continue with the 22 sequential evaluation process, to include obtaining vocational expert testimony, as necessary; 23 and offer the claimant the opportunity for a hearing, take further action to complete the 24 administrative record resolving the above issue, and issue a new decision. 25 /// 26 /// 27 /// 28 /// Page 1 [PROPOSED] ORDER C23-5976-SKV 1 2 After judgment, Plaintiff may be entitled to reasonable attorney’s fees and costs pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d), upon proper request to this Court. 3 4 DATED this 26th day of March, 2024. A 5 6 S. KATE VAUGHAN United States Magistrate Judge 7 8 9 10 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Presented by: s/ Sarah Moum Sarah Moum Special Assistant United States Attorney Office of Program Litigation, Office 7 Office of the General Counsel Social Security Administration 6401 Security Boulevard Baltimore, MD 21235 Tel: (206) 615-2936 Email: sarah.moum@ssa.gov 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Page 2 [PROPOSED] ORDER C23-5976-SKV

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?