Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_15-cv-02386/USCOURTS-caed-2_15-cv-02386-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 863
Nature of Suit: Social Security - DIWC/DIWW (405(g))
Cause of Action: 42:416 Denial of Social Security Benefits

---

CROSS-MOT. SUMM. J. 1 CASE NO.: 2:15-cv-02386-KJN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SACRAMENTO DIVISION

MICHAEL E. TRUELSEN,

Plaintiff,

vs.

CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting 

Commissioner 

 Of Social Security,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CIVIL NO. 2:15-cv-02386-KJN

DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR 

LEAVE TO FILE SUR-REPLY 

MEMORANDUM; SUR-REPLY 

MEMORANDUM; AND 

DECLARATION OF SHARON 

LAHEY, ESQ., IN SUPPORT OF 

MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE SURREPLY MEMORANDUM

Carolyn W. Colvin, Acting Commissioner of Social Security (the “Commissioner”) hereby 

moves the Court for leave to file a sur-reply memorandum addressing arguments set forth in Michael E. 

Truelsen’s (“Plaintiff”) Response To Defendant’s Motion For Summary Judgment And/Or Remand 

From The Commissioner’s Final Decision (Docket Number 16) (the “Reply”). Contrary to Plaintiff’s 

assertion that the Commissioner did not contact him regarding his failure to submit the evidence upon 

which he seeks reversal and/or remand, the undersigned e-mailed Plaintiff’s counsel on April 28, 2016 

notifying him of his failure to submit the evidence. A true and correct copy of this e-mail is attached as 

Exhibit A to the Declaration of Sharon Lahey, Esq., filed herewith. Plaintiff’s counsel never replied to 

Ms. Lahey’s April 28, 2016 e-mail. 

PHILLIP A. TALBERT

Acting United States Attorney

DEBORAH LEE STACHEL

Acting Regional Chief Counsel, Region IV

Social Security Administration

SHARON LAHEY (CBSN 263027)

Special Assistant United States Attorney

160 Spear Street, Suite 800

San Francisco, California 94105

Telephone: (415) 977-8963

Facsimile: (415) 744-0134

E-Mail: sharon.lahey@ssa.com

Attorneys for DEFENDANT

Case 2:15-cv-02386-KJN Document 18 Filed 06/01/16 Page 1 of 3
CROSS-MOT. SUMM. J. 2 CASE NO.: 2:15-cv-02386-KJN

The Appeals Council properly excluded the evidence upon which Plaintiff bases his appeal

because it postdates the Commissioner’s decision and Plaintiff’s eligibility date for Disability Insurance 

Benefits under the Social Security Act (the “date last insured”) (Def.’s Cross-Mot. For Summ. J. 

(“Def.’s Brief”), pp. 5–6). In the Reply, Plaintiff’s counsel states that he would have no objection to the 

Court granting the Commissioner an opportunity to address the evidence Plaintiff failed to submit with 

his motions for summary judgment (Pl.s’ Br. at p. 2).1 Accordingly, the Commissioner respectfully 

requests that the Court grant the Commissioner leave to submit the sur-reply memorandum below.

SUR-REPLY MEMORANDUM

Even excusing, arguendo, Plaintiff’s procedural deficiencies, he continues to fail to establish any 

basis for reversal. The September 2, 2015 letter from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)

unambiguously identifies the “effective date” for its 100-percent disability rating as March 19, 2015, 

well after Plaintiff’s September 30, 2011 date last insured and the November 26, 2014 ALJ decision 

(Defendant’s Brief at pp. 5–6) (Docket Number 16-2, p. 4). Therefore, in addition to the valid reasons 

for affirmance set forth in Defendant’s Brief, to wit, the Social Security Administration is not bound by 

a VA determination, Plaintiff’s longitudinal treatment record show treatment adequately controlled his 

symptoms, Plaintiff’s activities of daily living show he was capable of performing the work set forth in 

his residual functional capacity, and the medical opinions supporting the Commissioner’s findings, the

September 2, 2015 VA letter on its face demonstrates that it does not present any basis for reversal.

Dated: May 26, 2016 Respectfully submitted,

PHILLIP A. TALBERT

Acting United States Attorney

DEBORAH LEE STACHEL

Acting Regional Chief Counsel, Region IX

Social Security Administration

By: /s/ Sharon Lahey 

SHARON LAHEY

Special Assistant U.S. Attorney

ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT

 

1

In the April 28, 2016 e-mail, Ms. Lahey also inquired as to why Plaintiff filed two seemingly identical 

motions for summary judgment (Docket Numbers 13 and 14). Plaintiff did not respond to this inquiry.

Case 2:15-cv-02386-KJN Document 18 Filed 06/01/16 Page 2 of 3
CROSS-MOT. SUMM. J. 3 CASE NO.: 2:15-cv-02386-KJN

ORDER

Good cause appearing, it is so ORDERED, Defendant is hereby granted leave to file a sur-reply 

memorandum. Defendant’s sur-reply memorandum submitted with her motion for leave to file a surreply memorandum shall be deemed filed as of the date of this order. No response to the sur-reply will 

be allowed.

Dated: June 1, 2016

Case 2:15-cv-02386-KJN Document 18 Filed 06/01/16 Page 3 of 3