Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Substantive rulingFiled Oct. 14, 2020

Couvertier v. Social Security

Judge
Sarah Netburn
Docket
1:19-cv-08533
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Social SecurityCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Blanca I. Couvertier v. Saul, Judge Netburn granted remand, partly granted and partly denied Couvertier’s benefits-remand request, and ordered further proceedings.

Who this affects

Blanca I. Couvertier and the Commissioner of Social Security. Couvertier received a remand requiring the disability finding beginning April 4, 2018, to be affirmed, while the period before that date must be reconsidered through further administrative proceedings.

What happened

Blanca I. Couvertier challenged the handling of her Social Security disability claim. The Commissioner asked the court to send the matter back for further proceedings, while Couvertier asked for judgment and a remand requiring an immediate award of benefits.

The court said the record did not require only one possible conclusion, so an immediate award of benefits was not appropriate. It ordered further review for the period before April 4, 2018, including reconsideration of medical evidence, Couvertier’s work-capacity assessment, and possibly testimony from a vocational expert.

Judge Sarah Netburn granted the Commissioner’s remand motion and granted in part and denied in part Couvertier’s motion. The Commissioner must affirm the finding that Couvertier became disabled beginning April 4, 2018, and the court closed the case.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Couvertier v. Social Security · No. 1:19-cv-08533
Judge
Sarah Netburn
Date
Oct. 14, 2020

Background

Blanca I. Couvertier brought this Social Security case against Andrew Saul, the Commissioner of Social Security. The Commissioner moved for remand, meaning that he asked the court to return the matter for further administrative proceedings. Couvertier moved for judgment on the pleadings and requested a remand limited to awarding her benefits.

Court’s Analysis

The court held that the record “does not compel but one conclusion.” Because the record did not require only one possible result, the court determined that a remand for an immediate award of benefits was not appropriate.

Ruling

Judge Sarah Netburn granted the Commissioner’s motion for remand. She granted in part and denied in part Couvertier’s motion for judgment on the pleadings and for a remand solely for an award of benefits.

The matter was remanded for further proceedings under the fourth sentence of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). On remand, the Commissioner must affirm the administrative law judge’s finding that Couvertier became disabled beginning April 4, 2018. For the period before April 4, 2018, the Commissioner must direct the administrative law judge to further evaluate Dr. Mahony’s opinion together with the other medical and opinion evidence, reassess Couvertier’s residual functional capacity, and, if warranted by the expanded record, obtain testimony from a vocational expert.

The clerk was directed to terminate the motions at ECF Nos. 14 and 18 and close the case.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.