Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_09-cv-00734/USCOURTS-caed-1_09-cv-00734-1/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Commissioner of Social Security
Defendant
Victor Reyes
Plaintiff

Document Text:

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

BENJAMIN B. WAGNER

United States Attorney

LUCILLE GONZALES MEIS

Regional Chief Counsel, Region IX

Social Security Administration

JEAN TURK [C.S.B.N.131517]

Special Assistant United States Attorney

333 Market Street, Suite 1500

San Francisco, California 94105

Telephone: (415) 977-8935

Facsimile: (415) 744-0134

E-Mail: Jean.Turk@ssa.gov

Attorneys for Defendant

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

FRESNO DIVISION

VICTOR REYES, )

)

Plaintiff, )

v. )

)

MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, )

Commissioner of )

Social Security, )

)

Defendant. )

_________________________________)

CIVIL NO. 1:09-0734 DLB

STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR

REMAND PURSUANT TO SENTENCE

FOUR OF 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) 

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED, by and between the parties, through their respective counsel of

record, that this action be remanded to the Commissioner of Social Security for further administrative

action pursuant to section 205(g) of the Social Security Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), sentence

four. Upon remand to the Commissioner of Social Security, the Appeals Council will remand this case to

the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) for either a finding of disability on the record, or a de novo hearing

and the issuance of a new decision. 

Additionally, on remand, if the ALJ does not issue an on-the-record decision finding Plaintiff

disabled, the Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) is instructed to take the following action:

1. The ALJ will address any third-party statements in the record, and if such statements are

rejected, the ALJ will provide specific reasons, germane to the witness, for the rejection.

Case 1:09-cv-00734-DLB Document 20 Filed 01/28/10 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

2. The ALJ will re-evaluate Plaintiff’s residual functional capacity (RFC). Any RFC finding

 should reflect levels of functioning as defined in the Dictionary of Occupational Titles rather than some

otherwise descriptive term adopted by the ALJ. 

3. As part of the ALJ’s re-evaluation of Plaintiff’s RFC, the ALJ will re-evaluate the medical

source opinions from Drs. Serrano and La Torre, and the ALJ will re-evaluate the credibility of Plaintiff’s

allegations.

4. The ALJ should obtain vocational expert (VE) testimony. Any hypothetical question to the

VE should include all of Plaintiff’s limitations supported by the record. The ALJ should further inquire

whether the VE’s response was consistent with the Dictionary of Occupational Titles and include an

explanation for any inconsistencies that may be identified.

5. The ALJ will consider Plaintiff’s subsequent award of benefits as of April 29, 2009, and any

impact on the current decision in accordance with HALLEX I-5-3-17.

 Respectfully submitted,

Law Offices of Jeffrey Milam

Dated: January 27, 2007 /s/ Sengthiene Bosavanh*

(As authorized via *e-mail)

SENGTHIENE BOSAVANH

Attorney for Plaintiff 

Dated: January 27, 2007 BENJAMIN B. WAGNER

United States Attorney

LUCILLE GONZALES MEIS

Regional Chief Counsel, Region IX

/s/ Jean M. Turk

JEAN M. TURK

Special Assistant U.S. Attorney 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: January 27, 2010 /s/ Dennis L. Beck 

9b0hie UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:09-cv-00734-DLB Document 20 Filed 01/28/10 Page 2 of 2