From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Irwin v. Colvin

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California
Aug 17, 2015
2:14-cv-01332-AC (E.D. Cal. Aug. 17, 2015)

Opinion


THERESA IRWIN, Plaintiff, v. CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant. No. 2:14-cv-01332-AC United States District Court, E.D. California. August 17, 2015

          ORDER

          ALLISON CLAIRE, Magistrate Judge.

         Plaintiff seeks judicial review of a final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security ("Commissioner") denying the application for period of disability and disability insurance benefits ("DIB") under Title II of the Social Security Act of her late husband, Mr. Steven L. Irwin. Plaintiff filed a motion for summary judgment on December 8, 2014. ECF No. 13. The Commissioner then filed a cross motion for summary judgment on February 5, 2015. ECF No. 16. On June 9, 2015, plaintiff filed a self-styled "request for leave to file a two page memorandum." ECF No. 19. In her memorandum, plaintiff argues that the ALJ's decision should be reversed and this matter should be remanded for the payment of benefits in light of Lounsburry v. Barnhart, 45 F.3d 1111 (9th Cir. 2006). Id.

         The court finds that plaintiff's supplemental memorandum presents an additional ground for remand not articulated in plaintiff's December 8, 2014, motion for summary judgment, ECF No. 13. Nevertheless, the court will grant plaintiff's request and construes the memorandum as a supplement to plaintiff's motion for summary judgment. Accordingly, the Commissioner will be ordered to file an opposition within twenty (20) days of the service of this order. The court will further order plaintiff to file a reply, if any, within fourteen (14) days of service of Commissioner's opposition.

         In accordance with the foregoing, THE COURT HEREBY ORDERS that plaintiff's request to submit a memorandum, ECF No. 19, is GRANTED. Plaintiff's memorandum is construed as a supplement to plaintiff's motion for summary judgment. The Commissioner shall file an opposition to plaintiff's memorandum within twenty (20) days of the service of this order. The Commissioner's opposition shall be limited to the applicability of Lounsburry v. Barnhart, supra. Plaintiff shall file a reply, if any, within fourteen (14) days of service of the Commissioner's opposition.


Summaries of

Irwin v. Colvin

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California
Aug 17, 2015
2:14-cv-01332-AC (E.D. Cal. Aug. 17, 2015)
Case details for

Irwin v. Colvin

Case Details

Full title:THERESA IRWIN, Plaintiff, v. CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting Commissioner of…

Court:United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California

Date published: Aug 17, 2015

Citations

2:14-cv-01332-AC (E.D. Cal. Aug. 17, 2015)