Estrada v. Berryhill

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA 7 CINDY M. E., 8 Plaintiff, Case No. C18-5362 RSM 9 v. ORDER GRANTING STIPULATED MOTION TO REOPEN AND 10 COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, ENTER JUDGMENT 11 Defendant. 12

This matter comes before the Court on Defendant’s Stipulated Motion to Reopen and 13 Enter Judgment. Dkt. 57. 14 In February 2019, the Honorable Mary Alice Theiler, United Stated Magistrate Judge, 15 issued a Report and Recommendation (R&R) affirming the Commissioner’s denial of Plaintiff’s 16 Social Security Benefits. Dkt. 16. After the Court adopted Judge Theiler’s R&R, Plaintiff 17 appealed. Dkts. 19–22. 18 On March 31, 2021, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals issued a memorandum decision 19 concluding that administrative review of Plaintiff’s application had not enjoyed the benefit of the 20 Ninth Circuit’s decision in Revels v. Berryhill, 874 F.3d 648 (9th Cir. 2017). Dkt. 27. The Ninth 21 Circuit therefore ordered that the Commissioner’s prior decision be vacated and that the matter 22 be remanded for reconsideration by the ALJ. Id. at 3. Accordingly, this Court ordered that 23 1 pursuant to sentence six of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), the matter was remanded for further 2 administrative proceedings in a manner consistent with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals’ 3 memorandum decision. Dkt. 29. The Court did not issue a final judgment. See Dkt. 30. 4 On August 2, 2023, Defendant filed this Motion, stating that on remand, the ALJ found 5 Plaintiff was not disabled prior to September 7, 2012, but became disabled beginning September 6 7, 2012. Dkt. 57 at 1. Accompanying Defendant’s Motion was a copy of Plaintiff’s partially 7 favorable administrative decision. Dkt. 58-1. 8 Based on the stipulation of the parties and good cause shown, and in light of the partially 9 favorable decision on Plaintiff’s claim for disability benefits, it is hereby ORDERED 10 that this matter is reopened. Further, consistent with the partially favorable final decision of the

11 Commissioner of Social Security, dated May 26, 2023, judgment is entered in favor of Plaintiff 12 pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). 13 DATED this 15th day of August, 2023.

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

18 19 20 21 22 23