Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-3_12-cv-08215/USCOURTS-azd-3_12-cv-08215-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 864
Nature of Suit: Social Security - SSID Title XVI
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

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Renee L. Lippert, 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Carolyn W. Colvin, Acting Commissioner

of Social Security, 

Defendant. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV-12-8215-PCT-LOA

ORDER

On May 29, 2013, the Commissioner filed an Unopposed Motion for Entry of

Judgment with Order to Remand, requesting the Court to remand this Social Security case

for further administrative proceedings pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). (Doc.

27) The Commissioner indicates that upon remand, “[t]he Appeals Council will remand the

case back to an Administrative Law Judge with instructions to re-evaluate Plaintiff’s residual

functional capacity, including, but not limited to, further evaluating the opinions of Dr.

Young (Tr. 436-42) and Dr. Griffith (Tr. 471-78) pursuant to the provisions of 20 C.F.R.§

404.1527 and Social Security Rulings 96-2p and 96-5p, and explain[ing] the weight given

to such opinion evidence in accordance with agency policy.” (Id. at 1-2) The motion

represents Plaintiff does not oppose this motion. (Id. at 2) The Commissioner also requests

the Court “[d]irect the clerk to enter a judgment in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 58,

consistent with the decision in Shalala v. Schaefer, 509 U.S. 292, 296-302 (1993).” (Id.)

There being no objection and good cause appearing,

IT IS ORDERED that the Commissioner’s Unopposed Motion for Entry of Judgment

Case 3:12-cv-08215-LOA Document 28 Filed 05/30/13 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 -

with Order to Remand, doc. 27, is GRANTED. The Commissioner’s decision denying

Plaintiff’s claim for disability insurance benefits is hereby REVERSED and this Social

Security case is REMANDED, pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), for further

administrative proceedings as set forth herein. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED kindly directing the Clerk of Court to enter judgment

in accordance with Rule 58(a) and (d), Fed.R.Civ.P., consistent with the decision in Shalala

v. Schaefer, 509 U.S. 292, 296-302 (1993). See Akopyan v. Barnhart, 296 F.3d 852, 854 (9th

Cir. 2002) (“A sentence four remand becomes a final judgment, for purposes of attorneys’

fees claims brought pursuant to the EAJA, . . . upon expiration of the time for appeal. . . A

plaintiff who obtains a sentence four remand is considered a prevailing party for purposes

of attorneys’ fees. . .This is so even when the case has been remanded for further

administrative action.”) (citations omitted).

Dated this 29th day of May, 2013.

Case 3:12-cv-08215-LOA Document 28 Filed 05/30/13 Page 2 of 2