Curtis Brown v. Commissioner of Social Security

Good Law
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaMarch 19, 20205:18-cv-01051California4,162 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

11 CURTIS B., an Individual, Case No.: 5:18-01051 ADS

Plaintiff,

v. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

OF REMAND

ANDREW M. SAUL, Commissioner of Social Security, 15 Defendant. 16 I. INTRODUCTION Plaintiff Curtis B.1 (“Plaintiff”) challenges Defendant Andrew M. Saul2, Commissioner of Social Security’s (hereinafter “Commissioner” or “Defendant”) denial 20

1 Plaintiff’s name has been partially redacted in compliance with Federal Rule of Civil 22 Procedure 5.2(c)(2)(B) and the recommendation of the Committee on Court Administration and Case Management of the Judicial Conference of the United States. 23 2 The complaint, and thus the docket, do not name the Commissioner of Social Security. On June 17, 2019, Saul became the Commissioner. Thus, he is automatically substituted 24 as the defendant under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 25(d). of his application for supplemental security income (“SSI”). For the reasons stated below, the decision of the Commissioner is…

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.