Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_13-cv-01303/USCOURTS-caed-1_13-cv-01303-6/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 864
Nature of Suit: Social Security - SSID Title XVI
Cause of Action: 42:205 Denial Social Security Benefits

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JASON TRAVIS UHL,

 Plaintiff,

v.

CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting 

Commissioner of Social Security,

 Defendant.

Case No. 1:13-cv-01303-SMS

ORDER AFFIRMING AGENCY’S DENIAL 

OF BENEFITS AND ORDERING 

JUDGMENT FOR COMMISSIONER

Plaintiff Jason Travis Uhl, by his attorneys, Law Offices of Lawrence D. Rohlfing, seeks 

judicial review of a final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security (“Commissioner”) 

denying his application for disability insurance benefits pursuant to Title II and for supplemental 

security income (“SSI”) pursuant to Title XVI of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. § 301 et seq.) 

(the “Act”). The matter is before the Court on the parties' cross-briefs, which were submitted, 

without oral argument, to the Honorable Sandra M. Snyder, U.S. Magistrate Judge. 

Plaintiff alleges that the Commissioner erred in failing to assess properly his personality 

disorder and drug addiction and alcoholism ("DAA") using the criteria set forth in Social Security 

Ruling 13-2p. The Commissioner appears not to dispute the application of SSR 13-2p. The Court 

notes, however, that the effective date of SSR 13-2p, which is March 22, 2013, was more than a 

year after the ALJ issued his decision in this matter.

Case 1:13-cv-01303-SMS Document 25 Filed 01/23/15 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

Accordingly, the Court hereby ORDERS each party to submit a supplemental brief, not to 

exceed five (5) pages, explaining why SSR 13-2p applies in this case. Both briefs shall be filed with 

the Court on or before February 4, 2015. If either party finds a reply brief to be necessary, he or she 

shall file the reply on or before February 9, 2015. In the alternative, should the parties agree on the 

ruling's application, they may provide the Court with their stipulation to that effect on or before 

February 4, 2015. The Court shall then take the matter under submission.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 23, 2015 /s/ Sandra M. Snyder 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:13-cv-01303-SMS Document 25 Filed 01/23/15 Page 2 of 2