Moores

Moores v. Colvin

Good Law
173 F. Supp. 3d 989·2016 WL 1137094·2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 38148
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaMarch 23, 2016No. 2:14-cv-2243-EFBCalifornia3,633 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Brennan, J.

ORDER

Plaintiff seeks judicial review of a final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security (“Commissioner”) denying her application for a period of disability and Disability Insurance Benefits (“DIB”) under Title II of the Social Security Act. The parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment are pending. 1 For the reasons discussed below, plaintiffs motion is granted, the Commissioner’s motion is denied, and the matter is remanded for further proceedings,

I. BACKGROUND

Plaintiff filed an application for a period of disability and DIB, alleging that she had been disabled since September 17, 2009. Administrative Record . (“AR”) 154-160, Plaintiffs application was denied initially and upon reconsideration. Id. at 104-106, 108-109. Ón December 4, 2012, a hearing was held before administrative law judge (“ALJ”) Amita Tracy. Id. at 43-93. Plaintiff was represented by counsel at the hearing, at which she, a third-party witness, and a vocational expert (“VE”) testified. Id.

On December 28, 2012, the ALJ issued a decision finding that plaintiff was not disabled under section 216(i) and 223(d) of the Act. 2 Id, at 25-37. The ALJ made the following specific findings:

Id. at…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.