Austin v. Commissioner of Social Security
Opinion
trial_court Opinion
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 EUREKA DIVISION 7 8 LUDMILA N. A.,1 Case No. 22-cv-06089-RMI
9 Plaintiff,
ORDER RE: CROSS MOTIONS FOR
10 v. SUMMARY JUDGMENT
11 COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL Re: Dkt. Nos. 13, 15
SECURITY,
12 Defendant. 13 14 Plaintiff seeks judicial review of an administrative law judge (“ALJ”) decision denying her 15 application for disability benefits under Title II of the Social Security Act. See Admin. Rec. at 1.2 16 The Appeals Council of the Social Security Administration (“SSA”) declined to review the ALJ’s 17 decision. Id. As such, the ALJ’s decision is a “final decision” of the Commissioner of Social 18 Security, appropriately reviewable by this court. See 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), 1383(c)(3). Both parties 19 have consented to the jurisdiction of a magistrate judge (dkts. 4, 9) and both parties have moved 20 for summary judgment (dkts. 23, 15). For the reasons stated below, Plaintiff’s Motion for 21 Summary Judgment is granted, and Defendant’s Cross-Motion…