Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_06-cv-00930/USCOURTS-cand-4_06-cv-00930-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 864
Nature of Suit: Social Security - SSID Title XVI
Cause of Action: 42:1383 Review of HHS Decision

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JERRY FLAGG,

Plaintiff,

v.

JO ANNE B. BARNHART, Commissioner of

Social Security,

Defendant. /

No. C 06-930 SBA

ORDER

On August 9, 2006, the parties informed the Court that the Commissioner of Social Security

was unable to locate Plaintiff's claim file. Thus, pursuant to the stipulation of the parties, the Court

ordered that this case be remanded pursuant to sentence 6 of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for further

proceedings. The Appeals Council was ordered to remand the case to an Administrative Law Judge

for reconstruction of the administrative record and for a de novo hearing. [Docket No. 11].

On November 2, 2006, Defendant notified this Court that Plaintiff's claim file had been

located and the tape recording of his original hearing transcribed. According to Defendant, "the

need for remand to reconstruct the file or for a new hearing is now moot." Thus, Defendant requests

that the Court vacate the remand and reopen the case. Further, Defendant answers Plaintiff's

complaint and asserts affirmative defenses. [Docket No. 12]. The administrative transcript has been

filed with this Court.

Plaintiff opposes Defendant's request, arguing that Defendant failed to comply with the

Court's order: "[i]nstead, the Appeals Council used the Court's remand to obtain additional time to

search for the file and prepare an Answer to the Plaintiff's Complaint." Plaintiff seeks what was

previously ordered – a new hearing and decision by an ALJ. [Docket No. 14].

Case 4:06-cv-00930-SBA Document 15 Filed 11/15/06 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

This Court finds Plaintiff's argument to be without merit. The sole reason for the remand

was the fact that the Commissioner was previously unable to locate the file. Because the file has

been located, proceeding with a new hearing would be an unnecessary waste of resources. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the remand is VACATED and this case is

REOPENED. Docket No. 12 shall constitute Defendant's Answer to Plaintiff's Complaint. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT, in accordance with this Court's Social Security

Procedural Order, Plaintiff shall serve and file a motion for summary judgment within thirty days of

the date of this order. Defendant shall serve and file any opposition or counter-motion within thirty

days of service of Plaintiff's motion. Plaintiff may serve and file a reply within fourteen days of

service of Defendant's opposition or counter-motion. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

 Dated: November 15, 2006 SAUNDRA BROWN ARMSTRONG

United States District Judge

Case 4:06-cv-00930-SBA Document 15 Filed 11/15/06 Page 2 of 2