John Metsker attended law school at The University of San Francisco School of Law where he served as a technical editor on the Maritime Law Journal and was a recipient of a CALI award for outstanding academic achievement. He is a member of the California State Bar and has been admitted to practice before multiple U.S. district courts, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, and the Supreme Court of the United States.
When a disability case is remanded by a district court, the scope of the court's remand order can often determine the outcome upon remand. Although the Social Security Administration prefers to decide all issues de novo when conducting remand hearings, the agency's preference is not binding upon the courts. Using creative advocacy techniques, plaintiffs' attorneys can effectively "lock in" favorable findings from the original ALJ decision, thus preventing a subsequent ALJ from upsetting those findings on remand.
Key topics to be discussed:
This course is co-sponsored with myLawCLE.
Closed-captioning available
John Metsker | The Metsker Law Firm
John Metsker attended law school at The University of San Francisco School of Law where he served as a technical editor on the Maritime Law Journal and was a recipient of a CALI award for outstanding academic achievement. He is a member of the California State Bar and has been admitted to practice before multiple U.S. district courts, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, and the Supreme Court of the United States.
Mr. Metsker has been representing disabled individuals before the Social Security Administration since 2010. John Metsker is a frequent speaker on vocational issues that arise in the context of Social Security Disability cases. His 2023 presentation “Mastering the VE Cross-Examination” is now available in the NADR Store. Mr. Metsker was also featured on episode 13 of the NADR Podcast, titled “Getting to know John Metsker.”
I. District court remand orders | 6:30pm – 6:50pm
II. Social Security Administration remand procedures | 6:50pm – 7:10pm
III. Advocacy strategies to preserve favorable findings | 7:10pm – 7:30pm