Case Name in Social Security Case - Unavailable

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION (DAYTON)
AMANDA W.,1
Plaintiff,
vs.
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL
SECURITY,
Defendant.
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
Case No. 3:26-cv-00101
Magistrate Judge Caroline H. Gentry
(by full consent of the parties)
ORDER FOR CLARIFICATION
Plaintiff filed this action to obtain judicial review of the decision of Defendant
Commissioner of Social Security to deny her application for disability benefits. On May
26, 2026, Defendant timely filed the First Certified Administrative Record. (First AR,
Doc. No. 8.) Plaintiff, in turn, filed her Statement of Specific Errors on September 8,
2026. (Doc. No. 10.) After Defendant files a Memorandum in Opposition and Plaintiff
files a Reply Memorandum, the matter will be ripe for the Court to issue its ruling.
Inexplicably, however, Defendant filed a Second Certified Administrative Record
(Second AR, Doc. No. 11) on September 9, 2026, after Plaintiff had filed her Statement
of Specific Errors. The Second AR has the same certification date (April 13, 2026), same
table of contents and same number of exhibits as the First AR, but it is significantly
1 See S.D. Ohio General Order 22-01 (“The Committee on Court Administration and Case Management
of the Judicial Conference of the United States has recommended that due to significant privacy concerns
in social security cases federal courts should refer to claimants only by their first names and last
initials.”).
Case: 3:26-cv-00101-CHG Doc #: 12 Filed: 10/15/26 Page: 1 of 2 PAGEID #: <pageID>

2
longer – it totals 5,129 pages rather than the 4,555 pages in the First AR. Unfortunately,
Defendant failed to provide any explanation for the second filing. Consequently, it is
unclear whether Plaintiff should be permitted to submit a revised Statement of Errors.
Accordingly, the Court ORDERS Defendant to file a Notice of Clarification by
no later than October 23, 2026. In that Notice, Defendant shall explain: (1) why the
Second AR was filed, (2) which specific pages were added and/or deleted as compared to
the First AR, and (3) whether the Second AR is intended to supplement or replace the
First AR. The Court sua sponte stays Defendant’s deadline to file a Memorandum in
Opposition, which is currently due on October 23, 2026, until it can determine the
appropriate next steps in this matter.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
/s/ Caroline H. Gentry
Caroline H. Gentry
United States Magistrate Judge
Case: 3:26-cv-00101-CHG Doc #: 12 Filed: 10/15/26 Page: 2 of 2 PAGEID #: <pageID>