Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_16-cv-01891/USCOURTS-caed-2_16-cv-01891-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 864
Nature of Suit: Social Security - SSID Title XVI
Cause of Action: 42:205 Denial Social Security Benefits

---

-1-

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

PHILLIP A. TALBERT

United States Attorney 

DEBORAH LEE STACHEL

Regional Chief Counsel

C. HAY-MIE CHO, CSBN 282259

Special Assistant United States Attorney

Social Security Administration, Region IX

160 Spear Street, Suite 800

San Francisco, California 94105 

Tel: (415) 268-5610

Fax: (415) 744-0134

E-mail: haymie.cho@ssa.gov

Attorneys for Defendant

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SACRAMENTO DIVISION

DEWAYNE BOYD, 

Plaintiff,

v.

NANCY A. BERRYHILL,

1

Acting Commissioner of Social Security,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No. 2:16-cv-01891-KJN 

ORDER OF REMAND

Based upon the parties’ Stipulation to Voluntary Remand Pursuant to Sentence Four of 

42 U.S.C. § 405(g) and to Entry of Judgment (“Stipulation to Remand”) (ECF No. 15), and for 

cause shown, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the above-captioned action be remanded to the 

Acting Commissioner of Social Security for further proceedings consistent with the terms of the 

Stipulation to Remand. 

 

1 Nancy A. Berryhill is now the Acting Commissioner of Social Security. Pursuant to Rule 25(d) 

of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Nancy A. Berryhill should be substituted for Acting 

Commissioner Carolyn W. Colvin as the defendant in this suit. No further action needs to be 

taken to continue this suit by reason of the last sentence of section 205(g) of the Social Security 

Act, 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).

Case 2:16-cv-01891-KJN Document 16 Filed 03/02/17 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

On remand, the Appeals Council will remand the case to an administrative law judge 

(“ALJ”) with instructions to reevaluate the medical evidence of record, reassess Plaintiff’s 

residual functional capacity, and obtain supplemental vocational expert testimony if needed. The 

ALJ will take any further action deemed necessary to develop the record and issue a new 

decision.

Furthermore, pursuant to the parties’ request, the Clerk of Court is directed to enter final 

judgment in favor of Plaintiff, and against Defendant, reversing the final decision of the 

Commissioner, and shall close this case.

Dated: March 2, 2017

Case 2:16-cv-01891-KJN Document 16 Filed 03/02/17 Page 2 of 2