Olson v. Kijakazi
- Proceeding
- district
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- Karen S. Crawford (author)
Analysis
The parties jointly moved for voluntary remand to the agency under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) following a meet-and-confer process. The court granted the motion, ordered the Appeals Council to remand the case to an ALJ for a new hearing and decision, and directed the entry of judgment in favor of the plaintiff.
| What the court decided | The model |
|---|---|
Grant of Joint Motion for Voluntary Remand to Agency“Having reviewed the Complaint and the Joint Motion, the Court GRANTS the Joint Motion.” | agree with court The court correctly grants the motion because the parties jointly requested it, and sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) permits the court to remand the case to the agency for further action when the parties agree to such a disposition. The order recites that the parties met and conferred, satisfying the procedural prerequisite for such a joint motion in this district. |
Entry of Judgment in Favor of Plaintiff“The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to enter a final judgment in favor of plaintiff, and against defendant.” | agree with court In Social Security cases, when a court grants a sentence four remand, it is standard practice to enter judgment in favor of the claimant to establish them as the prevailing party for purposes of attorney's fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act. The court correctly directs this entry. |
The order itself: sound — The order is procedurally correct and concise. It accurately applies the sentence four remand mechanism and correctly cites the Ninth Circuit authority regarding the start of the EAJA fee clock. There are no gaps in the reasoning because the decision is based on the parties' joint stipulation rather than a substantive legal dispute.
Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ANGELA O., Case No.: 23-cv-1212-KSC 12 Plaintiff, Order on Joint Motion For Voluntary 13 v. Remand to Agency Pursuant to Sentence Four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) 14 KILOLO KIJAKAZI, and Entry of Judgment [Doc. No. 12] 15 Defendant. 16 17 Plaintiff filed this action challenging the final decision of the Commissioner of 18 Social Security denying plaintiff’s claim for benefits. Doc. No. 1. This Court directed the 19 parties to explore informal resolution of the matter through the meet-and-confer process. 20 See Doc. No. 10. On September 28, 2023, having met and conferred, the parties jointly 21 moved for remand under sentence for of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). Doc No. 12 (the “Joint 22 Motion”). 23 Having reviewed the Complaint and the Joint Motion, the Court GRANTS the Joint 24 Motion. Upon remand, the Appeals Council will remand the case to an Administrative Law 25 Judge (ALJ) with instructions to offer Plaintiff the opportunity for a new hearing, re- 26 evaluate the evidence of record, and issue a new decision. The Clerk of Court is 27 DIRECTED to enter a final judgment in favor of plaintiff, and against defendant. The 28 entry of judgment will begin the running of the thirty-day period for which plaintiff, as the 1 || prevailing party, may make a timely application for attorneys’ fees under the Equal Access 2 ||to Justice Act. See 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)(1)(B); Akopyan v. Barnhart, 296 F.3d 852, 854 3 || (9th Cir. 2002). 4 IT IS SO ORDERED. 5 || Dated: September 28, 2023 JE. Le 6 Mil Y Sa 7 Hort. Karen S. Crawford United States Magistrate Judge 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28