Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-03554/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-03554-2/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Jo Anne B. Barnhart
Defendant
Pamela R. Churchill
Plaintiff

Document Text:

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

PAMELA R. CHURCHILL,

Plaintiff,

v.

JO ANNE B. BARNHART,

Defendant.

________________________________/

No. C-05-3554 JCS

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING

IN PART PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR

SUMMARY JUDGMENT, GRANTING

DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO REMAND AND

REMANDING FOR ADDITIONAL

PROCEEDINGS [Docket Nos. 12, 16]

Plaintiff in this action challenges a decision of the Social Security Commissioner (“the

Commissioner”) denying in part her application for Social Security Disability Benefits. In her

Motion for Summary Judgment (“Summary Judgment Motion”), Plaintiff requested that the Court

find Plaintiff disabled as a matter of law and award benefits. In the alternative, Plaintiff asked that

the case be remanded to the Social Security Commissioner for further proceedings. In response,

Defendant brought a motion requesting that the case be remanded for further proceedings (“the

Motion to Remand”), proposing specific instructions be given on remand. Defendant did not

address Plaintiff’s request that the Court find Plaintiff disabled as a matter of law. In her Reply,

Plaintiff agreed to Defendant’s request for remand, including the instructions proposed by

Defendant, thus implicitly withdrawing her request for an award of benefits by the Court. 

Accordingly, the Summary Judgment Motion is GRANTED as to Plaintiff’s request for remand and

DENIED as to her request for an award of benefits. The Motion to Remand is GRANTED.

Upon remand, the Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) will provide a detailed rationale

regarding the weight assigned to the opinions of Dr. Wilson Yap and Dr. Antoine Samman. The

ALJ also will assess Claimant’s obesity in accordance with Social Security Ruling 02-01p, and

Case 3:05-cv-03554-JCS Document 19 Filed 06/22/06 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

obtain medical expert testimony to assist in assessing the severity of Claimant’s combined

impairments from her alleged onset date until November 9, 2003, the date the ALJ found that

Claimant was disabled. The ALJ will further consider Claimant’s subjective complaints, and

provide a function-by-function assessment of Claimant’s ability to perform work-related activity,

with specific references to the evidence in the record in support of the assessed limitations.

The Court declines Plaintiff’s request to set a 60 day deadline for remand to the Social

Security Administration’s Office of Disability Adjudication and Review.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: June 22, 2006

______________________________

JOSEPH C. SPERO

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:05-cv-03554-JCS Document 19 Filed 06/22/06 Page 2 of 2