Marshall

Marshall v. Kijakazi

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaMarch 26, 20233:21-cv-07516California3,903 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 CARRIE A. MARSHALL, Case No. 21-cv-07516-WHO

Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR

REMAND AND REMANDING FOR AN

v. AWARD OF BENEFITS

KILOLO KIJAKAZI, Re: Dkt. Nos. 15, 18, 19 Defendant.

12 Plaintiff Carrie A. Marshall seeks review from a partially unfavorable decision by an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ), finding her disabled for one out of three contested periods. The Commissioner agrees that, with respect to the first and third periods at issue, the ALJ made significant errors in his analysis of plaintiff’s subjective complaints and the medical evidence, failing to apply the governing regulations. The Commissioner, therefore, moves for a second remand to allow the ALJ to revisit the first and third periods and reassess the subjective and medical evidence under the appropriate standards, redetermine Marshall’s appropriate Residual Functional Capacity (RFC), and solicit testimony from a Vocational Expert (VE)…

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.