Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_13-cv-02168/USCOURTS-azd-2_13-cv-02168-1/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 

WO 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

Juana Gutierrez, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

Carolyn W. Colvin, 

Defendant.

No. CV-13-02168-PHX-DGC

ORDER 

 Plaintiff Juana Gutierrez has filed a motion for reconsideration (Doc. 20) of the 

Court’s August 25, 2014 order remanding the case for further proceedings (Doc. 19). 

The Court will deny the motion. 

 Plaintiff argues that the case should have been remanded for an award of benefits 

based on the “credit-as-true” rule rather than for further proceedings. Doc. 20 at 2. 

Plaintiff argues that the opinions of Drs. Moya and Suarez, if credited as true, would 

establish disability as a matter of law and would not require interpretation by a vocational 

expert. Doc. 20 at 2. Plaintiff cites SSR 96-8p for the proposition that “an individual 

who cannot sustain a full time work pace – 8 hours a day, 5 days a week – is disabled[.]” 

Id. The Court is not convinced that Plaintiff accurately reads the regulation, nor is it 

convinced that the limitations assessed by Drs. Moya and Suarez would preclude all work 

for Plaintiff. 

 In Smolen v. Chater, 80 F.3d 1273, 1292 (9th Cir. 1996), the Ninth Circuit held 

that evidence should be credited and an action remanded for an immediate award of 

Case 2:13-cv-02168-DGC Document 21 Filed 09/12/14 Page 1 of 2
- 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 

benefits when the following three factors are satisfied: (1) the ALJ has failed to provide 

legally sufficient reasons for rejecting evidence; (2) there are no outstanding issues that 

must be resolved before a determination of disability can be made; and (3) it is clear from 

the record that the ALJ would be required to find the claimant disabled were such 

evidence credited. Plaintiff correctly notes that even where the requirements of the 

credit-as-true rule are met, the Court may “remand for further proceedings when the 

record as a whole creates serious doubt as to whether the claimant is, in fact, disabled.” 

Garrison v. Colvin, -- F.3d --, 2014 WL 3397218, at *21 (9th Cir. 2014). 

 An analysis of the opinions of Drs. Moya and Suarez demonstrates the existence 

of outstanding issues and provides serious doubt as to whether the record establishes that 

Plaintiff is disabled. Dr. Suarez opined that Plaintiff had no restrictions on standing or 

walking (A.R. 230), while Dr. Moya opined that Plaintiff could sit for more than four 

hours but less than six and stand or walk for less than 2 hours (A.R. 333). The vocational 

expert was asked a hypothetical about a person that could stand, sit, and walk for six 

hours per day and based her opinion on those restrictions. A.R. 40. She did not consider 

the limitations assessed by Dr. Suarez. Assuming the opinion of Dr. Suarez regarding 

Plaintiff’s unlimited ability to stand and walk were credited as true, the Court cannot 

conclude that an award of benefits would be required. This evidence creates serious 

doubt as to whether Plaintiff is disabled and is precisely the type of outstanding issue for 

which further proceedings would serve a useful purpose. Accordingly, the Court will not 

reconsider its decision to remand the case for further proceedings. 

IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration (Doc. 20) is denied. 

 Dated this 12th day of September, 2014. 

Case 2:13-cv-02168-DGC Document 21 Filed 09/12/14 Page 2 of 2