Saul

Paul H. v. Saul

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaSeptember 10, 20213:20-cv-05783California4,376 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 PAUL H., Case No. 20-cv-05783-JSC

Plaintiff,

ORDER RE: CROSS-MOTIONS FOR

v. SUMMARY JUDGMENT

ANDREW SAUL, Re: Dkt. Nos. 20, 22, 25 Defendant.

14 Plaintiff seeks social security benefits for physical impairments, including: chronic back pain, herniated discs, arthritis in neck and back, and carpal tunnel syndrome in both hands. (Administrative Record (“AR”) 252.) Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), Plaintiff filed this lawsuit for judicial review of the final decision by the Commissioner of Social Security (“Commissioner”) denying his benefits claim. Now before the Court are Plaintiff’s and Defendant’s motions for summary judgment.1 (Dkt. Nos. 20, 22.) After careful consideration of the parties’ briefing, the Court concludes that oral argument is unnecessary, see N.D. Cal. Civ. L.R. 7-1(b), GRANTS Plaintiff’s motion, DENIES Defendant’s cross-motion, and REMANDS for further proceedings. Because the Administrative Law Judge…

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.