Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-01332/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-01332-3/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 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

THERESA IRWIN, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting 

Commissioner of Social Security, 

Defendant. 

No. 2:14-cv-01332-AC 

ORDER 

Plaintiff seeks judicial review of a final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security 

(“Commissioner”) denying the application for period of disability and disability insurance 

benefits (“DIB”) under Title II of the Social Security Act of her late husband, Mr. Steven L. 

Irwin. Plaintiff filed a motion for summary judgment on December 8, 2014. ECF No. 13. The 

Commissioner then filed a cross motion for summary judgment on February 5, 2015. ECF No. 

16. On June 9, 2015, plaintiff filed a self-styled “request for leave to file a two page 

memorandum.” ECF No. 19. In her memorandum, plaintiff argues that the ALJ’s decision 

should be reversed and this matter should be remanded for the payment of benefits in light of 

Lounsburry v. Barnhart, 45 F.3d 1111 (9th Cir. 2006). Id. 

The court finds that plaintiff’s supplemental memorandum presents an additional ground 

for remand not articulated in plaintiff’s December 8, 2014, motion for summary judgment, ECF 

Case 2:14-cv-01332-AC Document 20 Filed 08/17/15 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

No. 13. Nevertheless, the court will grant plaintiff’s request and construes the memorandum as a 

supplement to plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment. Accordingly, the Commissioner will be 

ordered to file an opposition within twenty (20) days of the service of this order. The court will 

further order plaintiff to file a reply, if any, within fourteen (14) days of service of 

Commissioner’s opposition. 

In accordance with the foregoing, THE COURT HEREBY ORDERS that plaintiff’s 

request to submit a memorandum, ECF No. 19, is GRANTED. Plaintiff’s memorandum is 

construed as a supplement to plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment. The Commissioner shall 

file an opposition to plaintiff’s memorandum within twenty (20) days of the service of this order. 

The Commissioner’s opposition shall be limited to the applicability of Lounsburry v. Barnhart, 

supra. Plaintiff shall file a reply, if any, within fourteen (14) days of service of the 

Commissioner’s opposition. 

DATED: August 17, 2015 

Case 2:14-cv-01332-AC Document 20 Filed 08/17/15 Page 2 of 2