CONCEPCION
v.
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
In this Social Security disability benefits case, the District Court granted an unopposed motion to remand the case to the Commissioner for further administrative proceedings. The court found remand appropriate under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) sentence four to address gaps in the administrative record including inadequate consideration of medical evidence and vocational matters.
The court granted the unopposed motion for remand and reversed and remanded the Commissioner's decision under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) sentence four, finding that the failure to fully develop the record and adequately consider medical opinions, residual functional capacity, and vocational evidence warranted remand for further administrative action.
[1] A court may reverse and remand a social security case for rehearing under 42 U.S.C. …
[2] A court may grant an unopposed motion for remand in a social security case.
Previewing 2 of 5 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“Pursuant to Title 42, United States Code, Section 405(g) the Court is empowered to reverse the decision of the Commissioner with or without remanding the cause for a rehearing.”
Establishes the court's statutory authority to reverse and remand Social Security decisions
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePlaintiff sought judicial review of a Social Security Commissioner's decision regarding disability benefits. The case came before the court on the Com…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Duty To Develop The Record cases and more on FLexlaw
This matter is before the undersigned on Defendant's unopposed motion for entry of judgment with remand in which Defendant requests that the Court remand this case so that the Commissioner can take further administrative action. (Doc. 9). Defendant states that Plaintiff has no objection to the Motion to Remand.
Pursuant to Title 42, United States Code, Section 405(g) the Court is empowered to reverse the decision of the Commissioner with or without remanding the cause for a rehearing. Shalala v. Schaefer, 113 S. Ct. 2625 (1993). The failure of the ALJ to develop the record constitutes sufficient grounds for remand. Brissette v. Heckler, 730 F. 2d 548 (8th Cir. 1984), appeal after remand 613 F. Supp. 722 (E.D. Mo. 1985), judgment aff'd in part, rev'd in part, 784 F. 2d 864 (8th Cir. 1986). On remand under sentence four, the ALJ should review the case on a complete record, including any new material evidence. Diorio v. Heckler, 721 F. 2d 726, 729 (11th Cir. 1983) (finding that it was necessary for the ALJ on remand to consider psychiatric report tendered to Appeals Council); Reeves v. Heckler, 734 F. 2d 519, 522
n. 1 (11th Cir. 1984) (holding that the ALJ should consider on remand the need for an orthopedic evaluation).
Therefore, the undersigned agrees with the parties that it is appropriate to remand this matter to the Commissioner. Accordingly, it is respectfully ORDERED that:
(1) Defendant's unopposed motion for entry of judgment with remand (Doc. 9) is GRANTED.
(2) This action is REVERSED AND REMANDED pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) to the Commissioner for the following reasons:
On remand, the Administrative Law Judge will offer the claimant the opportunity for a hearing; give further consideration to the medical source opinions and prior administrative medical findings; give further consideration to the claimant's maximum residual functional capacity; obtain supplemental evidence from a vocational expert; take any further action needed to complete the administrative record; and issue a new decision.
(3) The Clerk is directed to enter judgment accordingly and close the file.
DONE and ORDERED in Ocala, Florida on July 14, 2025.
am
PHILIP R. LAMMENS
United States Magistrate Judge
Copies furnished to:
Counsel of Record Unrepresented Parties
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Brissette v. Heckler, 784 F.2d 864 (8th Cir. 1986)…r the judicial phase of the case but denied the fee request based on the contingent fee contract. This appeal followed. We affirm on the EAJA issue without further discussion for the reasons given by the district court in its order of June 25, 1985, 613 F.Supp. 722,1 but reverse and remand on the fee adjudication for attorney Reid. Brissette lost disability benefits awarded in 1974 through an administrative determination in 1981. Seeking to have his benefits restored, Brissette obtained counsel from the Meram…
-
Weakley v. Otis R. Bowen, M.D., 803 F.2d 575 (10th Cir. 1986)…ar physician). The government argues that the mere fact that the district court below affirmed the AU’s decision “strongly suggests that the government’s position was reasonable and therefore substantially justified.” It cites Brissette v. Heckler, 613 F.Supp. 722, 725 (E.D.Mo.1985), which summarily states this proposition without discussion in denying attorney’s fees under EAJA. However, the more considered position in this regard can be found in Broad Avenue Laundry & Tailoring v. United States, 693 F. 2d 1…
-
Ford v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec. (M.D. Fla. 2025)…ause for a rehearing. See 42 U.S.C. § 405(g);¹ Shalala, 509 U.S. at 296-302. The failure of the ALJ to develop the record constitutes sufficient grounds for remand. See Brissette v. Heckler, 730 F.2d 548, 549-50 (8th Cir. 1984), appeal after remand, 613 F. Supp. 722 (E.D. Mo. 1985), aff'd in part, rev’d in part, 784 F.2d 864 (8th Cir. 1986). Further, where the court cannot discern the basis for the Commissioner's decision, a sentence four remand may be appropriate to allow him to explain the basis for his decis…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Shalala v. Schaefer, 509 U.S. 292 (U.S. 1993)
- Dirven D. Reeves v. Heckler, 734 F.2d 519 (11th Cir. 1984)
- Brissette v. Heckler, 730 F.2d 548 (8th Cir. 1984)
- Brissette v. Heckler, 784 F.2d 864 (8th Cir. 1986)