Estrada v. Berryhill

Opinion

6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 7 AT SEATTLE

8 CINDY M. ESTRADA, CASE NO. C18-5362 RSM

9 Plaintiff, ORDER OF REMAND

10 v.

11 ANDREW M. SAUL, Commissioner of Social Security, 12 Defendant. 13 14 This matter is before the Court following the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals’ issuance of 15 the mandate in Plaintiff’s appeal of this Court’s prior orders. Dkt. #28. 16 Plaintiff initiated this action for judicial review, under 42 U.S.C. §§ 405(g) and 17 § 1383(c)(3), of the Commissioner of Social Security’s (the “Commissioner”) final decision 18 denying her application for Title II Disability Insurance Benefits and Title XVI Supplemental 19 Security Income benefits. Dkt. #4. The Honorable Mary Alice Theiler, United States Magistrate 20 Judge, recommended that this Court affirm the decision of the Commissioner. Dkt. #16. 21 Considering Plaintiff’s objections to Judge Theiler’s Report and Recommendation (“R&R”), the 22 Court overruled the objections and adopted the R&R, affirming the Commissioner’s decision. 23 Dkt. #19. Plaintiff appealed. Dkt. #22. 24 1 On March 31, 2021, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals issued a memorandum decision 2 concluding that administrative review of Plaintiff’s application had not enjoyed the benefit of the 3 Ninth Circuit’s decision in Revels v. Berryhill, 874 F.3d 648 (9th Cir. 2017). The Ninth Circuit 4 characterized Revels as “conclude[ing] that the [administrative law judge (“ALJ”)] erred in 5 rejecting a claimant’s testimony where the ALJ stated that the testimony was ‘undercut by the

6 lack of “objective findings” supporting her claims of severe pain’ because examinations showing 7 mostly normal results ‘are perfectly consistent with debilitating fibromyalgia.’” Dkt. #27 at 2–3 8 (quoting Revels, 874 F.3d at 666). The Ninth Circuit therefore ordered that the Commissioner’s 9 prior decision be vacated and that the matter be remanded for reconsideration by the ALJ. Id. at 10 3. The Ninth Circuit’s mandate was issued on May 25, 2021. Dkt. #28. 11 Accordingly, this Court hereby finds and ORDERS that pursuant to sentence six of 42 12 U.S.C. § 405(g), this matter is REMANDED for further administrative proceedings in a manner 13 consistent with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals’ memorandum decision. 14 Dated this 26th day of May, 2021.

15 16 A 17 RICARDO S. MARTINEZ 18 CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

19 20 21 22 23 24