Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Jolley v. Colvin

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit

December 19, 2013

Tamra Ann Jolley, Plaintiff,
v.
Carolyn W. Colvin, Defendant.

ORDER

JAMES A. TEILBORG, Senior District Judge.

Plaintiff in this case applied for and was denied social security disability benefits. Plaintiff appealed that denial to this Court. On appeal, Defendant has conceded error and asked this Court to remand to the agency for further findings. Plaintiff argues that remand should be for an immediate award of benefits and not for further findings.

The Court has reviewed the motion to remand and the response (the Government did not file a reply). Unfortunately the motion and the response are on completely different topics. Specifically, the motion to remand claims that the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) erred in several respects regarding Plaintiff's mental limitations. Conversely, the response argues that regardless of the errors the ALJ committed on the mental limitations, the ALJ's errors regarding Plaintiff's physical limitations (as recounted by her treating physicians, herself, and third parties) alone justify a remand for award of benefits. Plaintiff then argues that the ALJ's errors as admitted by Defendant regarding mental limitations do not justify remand for a completely new determination on the physical limitations. Again, Defendant did not file a reply to address any of these arguments.

Because the parties' briefs are on completely different topics, the Court will require supplemental briefing. First, Defendant will be required to file a reply to address the alleged errors regarding Plaintiff's physical limitations. Second, Plaintiff will be required to file a sur-reply addressing: 1) if the Court agrees that the ALJ committed errors regarding Plaintiff's physical limitations, the appropriate remedy applying the standard set out in Agnew-Currier v. Astrue, 875 F.Supp.2d 967 (D. Ariz. 2012); and 2) if the Court affirms the ALJ's findings on the physical limitations, the remedy sought by Plaintiff on the admitted errors with respect to the mental limitations.

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED that Defendant shall file a reply within 14 days.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff shall file a sur-reply within 28 days.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.