Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-01017/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-01017-6/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 864
Nature of Suit: Social Security - SSID Title XVI
Cause of Action: 42:416 Denial of 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

McGREGOR W. SCOTT

United States Attorney

LUCILLE GONZALES MEIS

Regional Chief Counsel, Region IX

Social Security Administration

ELIZABETH FIRER

Special Assistant United States Attorney

333 Market Street, Suite 1500

San Francisco, California 94105

Telephone: (415) 977-8943

Facsimile: (415) 744-0134

E-Mail: Elizabeth.Firer@ssa.gov

Attorneys for Defendant

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ONG YANG, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. )

)

MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, )

Commissioner of )

Social Security, )

)

Defendant. )

_________________________________)

CIVIL NO. 2:07-CV-01017-EFB

STIPULATION AND ORDER OF

VOLUNTARY REMAND AND DISMISSAL

OF CASE, WITH DIRECTIONS TO CLERK

TO ENTER JUDGMENT

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by the parties, through their undersigned attorneys, and with the

approval of the Court as provided below, that the Commissioner has agreed to a voluntary remand of

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

Upon remand, the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) must give further consideration to the

treating and examining source opinions, including the opinion evidence provided by Hsiung Su, M.D.

and Bradley Daigle, M.D., pursuant to the provisions of 20 C.F.R. § 416.927, Social Security Rulings

(SSR) 96-2p and 96-5p; the ALJ must explain the weight given to such opinion evidence. As

appropriate, the ALJ may request the treating and/or examining sources to provide additional evidence

and/or further clarification of the medical source statements about what Plaintiff can still do despite the

impairments.

The ALJ must also consider the lay evidence in the record in accordance with 20 C.F.R. §

416.913(d)(4) and SSR 06-03p, specifically, the ALJ must consider the information from Plaintiff’s son,

Case 2:07-cv-01017-EFB Document 29 Filed 09/19/08 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 - Stip & Order of Sentence Four Remand

Vameng Cha (AR 241-249). The hearing decision should contain rationale which shows the lay

information was considered when assessing Plaintiff’s credibility; it should contain articulation

regarding the weight given to the lay information, and if rejected, it must contain reasons germane to

each lay source.

The ALJ will also be directed to obtain evidence from a medical expert to clarify the nature and

severity of Plaintiff’s impairment pursuant to 20 C.F.R. § 416.927f and SSR 96-6p, and to clarify the

record concerning an appropriate date of onset of disability, in accordance with SSR 83-20.

If warranted by the expanded record, the ALJ should obtain supplemental evidence from a

vocational expert to clarify the effect of the assessed limitations on Plaintiff’s occupational base and

follow the direction of SSR 00-4p.

It is further stipulated that the administrative decision is hereby vacated and that the Clerk of this

Court shall be directed to enter a separate judgment herein, as provided for under Rules 58 and 79(a) of

the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, pursuant to Shalala v. Schaefer, 509 U.S. 292, 113 S. Ct. 2625

(1993).

Respectfully submitted,

Dated: September 19, 2008 /s/ Bess Brewer (As authorized via email)

BESS M. BREWER

Attorney for Plaintiff

Dated: September 19, 2008 McGREGOR W. SCOTT

United States Attorney

LUCILLE GONZALES MEIS

Regional Chief Counsel, Region IX

Social Security Administration

/s/ Elizabeth Firer ELIZABETH FIRER

Special Assistant U.S. Attorney 

Attorneys for Defendant

ORDER

SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 19, 2008.

Case 2:07-cv-01017-EFB Document 29 Filed 09/19/08 Page 2 of 2