Opinion
23-cv-04741-RMI
11-07-2024
CHHOM CHHEUN, Plaintiff, v. KILOLO KIJAKAZI, et al., Defendants.
ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR CLARIFICATION RE: DKT. NO. 25
ROBERT M. ILLMAN United States Magistrate Judge
Now pending before the court is Defendant's Motion for Clarification (dkt. 25), to which Plaintiff has filed no response. The court previously entered an Order (dkt. 23) and Judgment (dkt. 24) remanding this case for further proceedings. Defendant “requests that the Court clarify Page 8, lines 7 through 15, if its Order” (dkt. 23) to the following effect:
On remand, the ALJ is ORDERED as follows: (1) to conduct a new hearing such as to fully and fairly develop Plaintiff's testimony about the limitations he experienced as a result of the combination of all of his impairments (including the above-described conditions) during the relevant period; and (2) to develop the record regarding the functional limitations Plaintiff experienced during the relevant disability period. In developing the record, the ALJ may keep the record open for an appropriate period of time, during which Plaintiff is invited (a) to submit detailed reports or statements from his close relatives or friends addressed to the limitations he may have experienced during the relevant disability period; and (b) to contact treating sources (with assistance from the ALJ if requested) regarding their opinions about the limitations Plaintiff experienced during the relevant disability period as a result of his impairments.
Given that Plaintiff has filed no response in opposition, Defendant's request to alter or amend the court's judgment to reflect the clarification set forth above is GRANTED. All other portions of the court's Order for Remand and Judgment shall remain unchanged.
IT IS SO ORDERED.