(SS) Ortega v. Commissioner of Social Security

E.D. California

(SS) Ortega v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, E.D. California·Decided February 16, 2023·No. 1:22-cv-01058·Unknown

Opinion

MARIA TARESLI ORTEGA, Case No. 1:22-cv-01058-HBK Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING PARTIES’ STIPULATED MOTION TO REMAND v. UNDER SENTENCE FOUR OF 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), REVERSING FINAL DECISION AND KILOLO KIJAKAZI, ACTING REMANDING CASE1 COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, (Doc. No. 13)

Defendant. ORDER MOOTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (Doc. No. 10)

Pending before the Court is the parties’ joint motion to remand filed February 15, 2023. (Doc. No. 13). Plaintiff Maria Taresli Ortega and the Commissioner of Social Security agree that this case should be remanded for further administrative proceedings under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). (Id.). The United States Supreme Court held that the Social Security Act permits remand in conjunction with a judgment either affirming, reversing, or modifying the Secretary’s decision. 1 Both parties have consented to the jurisdiction of a magistrate judge in accordance with 28 U.S.C. §636(c)(1). (Doc. No. 8).

See Melkonyan vy. Sullivan, 501 U.S. 89, 97-98 (1991) (addressing issue of attorney’s fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act and calculating deadline using date of final judgment). The Melkonyan court recognized 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) contemplates only two types of remand — sentence four or sentence six. Jd. at 98. A sentence four remand authorizes a court to enter “a judgment affirming, modifying, or reversing the decision of the Secretary, with or without resetting the cause for a rehearing.” Jd. (other citations omitted). The Court grants the parties’ motion to remand under sentence four and reverses the Commissioner’s final decision. As agreed upon by the parties, upon remand, the Commissioner will further develop the record as necessary, and issue a new decision. Accordingly, it is ORDERED: 1. Pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C.§ 405(g), the Court grants the joint motion to remand (Doc. No. 13) and REVERSES the Commissioner’s decision. This case is REMANDED to the Commissioner of Social Security for further proceedings consistent with this Order. 2. A motion for attorney fees may be filed within thirty (30) days. 3. Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 10) is MOOT. 4. The Clerk shall enter judgment in favor of Plaintiff, terminate any deadlines, and close this case. Dated: _ February 16,2023 Mihaw. Wh. foareh Zaskth HELENA M. BARCH-KUCHTA UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

MARIA TARESLI ORTEGA, Case No. 1:22-cv-01058-HBK Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING PARTIES’ STIPULATED MOTION TO REMAND v. UNDER SENTENCE FOUR OF 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), REVERSING FINAL DECISION AND KILOLO KIJAKAZI, ACTING REMANDING CASE1 COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, (Doc. No. 13)

Defendant. ORDER MOOTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (Doc. No. 10)

Pending before the Court is the parties’ joint motion to remand filed February 15, 2023. (Doc. No. 13). Plaintiff Maria Taresli Ortega and the Commissioner of Social Security agree that this case should be remanded for further administrative proceedings under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). (Id.). The United States Supreme Court held that the Social Security Act permits remand in conjunction with a judgment either affirming, reversing, or modifying the Secretary’s decision. 1 Both parties have consented to the jurisdiction of a magistrate judge in accordance with 28 U.S.C. §636(c)(1). (Doc. No. 8).

See Melkonyan vy. Sullivan, 501 U.S. 89, 97-98 (1991) (addressing issue of attorney’s fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act and calculating deadline using date of final judgment). The Melkonyan court recognized 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) contemplates only two types of remand — sentence four or sentence six. Jd. at 98. A sentence four remand authorizes a court to enter “a judgment affirming, modifying, or reversing the decision of the Secretary, with or without resetting the cause for a rehearing.” Jd. (other citations omitted). The Court grants the parties’ motion to remand under sentence four and reverses the Commissioner’s final decision. As agreed upon by the parties, upon remand, the Commissioner will further develop the record as necessary, and issue a new decision. Accordingly, it is ORDERED: 1. Pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C.§ 405(g), the Court grants the joint motion to remand (Doc. No. 13) and REVERSES the Commissioner’s decision. This case is REMANDED to the Commissioner of Social Security for further proceedings consistent with this Order. 2. A motion for attorney fees may be filed within thirty (30) days. 3. Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 10) is MOOT. 4. The Clerk shall enter judgment in favor of Plaintiff, terminate any deadlines, and close this case. Dated: _ February 16,2023 Mihaw. Wh. foareh Zaskth HELENA M. BARCH-KUCHTA UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

(SS) Ortega v. Commissioner of Social Security, (E.D. Cal. 2023).

Pincite

(SS) Ortega v. Commissioner of Social Security ((SS) Ortega v. Commissioner of Social Security) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related