Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_13-cv-02187/USCOURTS-caed-2_13-cv-02187-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 863
Nature of Suit: Social Security - DIWC/DIWW (405(g))
Cause of Action: 42:405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID)

---

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

JOHN MARC VAN DEN HEUVEL,

Plaintiff,

v.

COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL 

SECURITY,

Defendant.

No. 2:13-cv-2187-KJN (PS)

ORDER

On November 13, 2014, plaintiff, who is proceeding without the assistance of counsel in this 

action, filed a motion styled as a “motion for consideration.” (ECF No. 28.) The court construes this

filing to be plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment based on a liberal construction of its contents. 

Accordingly, the Commissioner shall file her opposition and cross-motion for summary judgment by no 

later than December 18, 2014. In addition to addressing the merits of plaintiff’s motion, the 

Commissioner shall address in her cross-motion the impact of the additional extra-record medical evidence 

submitted by plaintiff in connection with the request for voluntary remand he submitted to the 

Commissioner and why the Commissioner found that additional evidence insufficient to stipulate to a 

voluntary remand of this case.

1

 Plaintiff shall file a reply, if any, within 21 days from service of the 

 

1

The Commissioner filed a notice of declination of voluntary remand on November 14, 2014,

that states that plaintiff submitted additional evidence not already in the record to the 

Commissioner in what appeared to be a request for voluntary remand of this case in light of the 

newly-submitted evidence. (ECF No. 27.) The Notice further states that the Commissioner 

Case 2:13-cv-02187-KJN Document 29 Filed 11/18/14 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

Commissioner’s opposition. No further briefing will be permitted in this action beyond plaintiff’s reply. 

Furthermore, no further extensions of time will be granted in this case absent a showing of special 

necessity by the party seeking such an extension.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 18, 2014

 

reviewed plaintiff’s additional evidence and declined to stipulate to a voluntary remand of this 

action. (Id.) Because it appears that plaintiff’s motion deemed to be his motion for summary 

judgment relies on many of the same additional medical records he submitted in support of his 

request for voluntary remand, the court finds that a statement of the evidence plaintiff submitted 

along with that request and the Commissioner’s reasons for declining to remand in light of that 

evidence would aid the court in resolving the merits of plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment.

Case 2:13-cv-02187-KJN Document 29 Filed 11/18/14 Page 2 of 2