BODE
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 appeal, the District Court for the Middle District of Florida granted the Commissioner's unopposed motion to remand the case for further proceedings under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). The court's decision allows the Commissioner to conduct additional administrative review while preserving the plaintiff's right to judicial review.
The court granted the Commissioner's unopposed motion to remand the action for further proceedings. The court recommended entering judgment in favor of the plaintiff and against the defendant, terminating pending motions, and closing the case following remand.
“a reviewing court "shall have power to enter, upon the pleadings and transcript of the record, a judgment affirming, modifying, or reversing the decision of the Commissioner of Social Security, with or without remanding the cause for a rehearing."”
Establishes the statutory authority and scope of judicial review available in Social Security appeals under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceBode filed an action challenging the Commissioner of Social Security's decision regarding Social Security benefits. The Commissioner subsequently move…
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 Social Security Act Judicial Review cases and more on FLexlaw
The Commissioner moves unopposed, Doc. 17, to remand this action for further proceedings under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). Sentence four explains that a reviewing court “shall have power to enter, upon the pleadings and transcript of the record, a judgment affirming, modifying, or reversing the decision of the Commissioner of Social Security, with or without remanding the cause for a rehearing.” See Shalala v. Schaefer, 509 U.S. 292, 296 (1993). I recommend granting the defendant’s motion and remanding this action to the Commissioner under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for further proceedings. I further recommend instructing the Clerk of Court (1) to enter a judgment in favor of the plaintiff and against the defendant, (2) to terminate any pending motions, and (3) to close the case. REPORTED on this 9th day of April, 2025.
Yi i
NDSAY S. GRIKF
United States Magistrate Judge
NOTICE TO PARTIES
A party has fourteen days from the day of service of this report either to file written objections to the proposed findings and recommendation or to seek an extension of the fourteen-day deadline. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). Under Eleventh Circuit Rule 3-1, a party failing to object to a magistrate judge’s findings or recommendations “waives the right to challenge on appeal the district court’s order based on unobjected-to factual and legal conclusions.” 11th Cir. R. 3-1; 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). If the parties wish to expedite the resolution of this matter, they may promptly file a joint notice of no objection.