ENGELS
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.
The court granted the Commissioner's unopposed motion, reversing the denial of Social Security benefits and remanding for further administrative proceedings.
The Commissioner of Social Security requested a reversal and remand of the denial of Plaintiff's Social Security benefits, conceding error. The Plaint…
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 42 U.S.C. § 405(G) Sentence Four Remand cases and more on FLexlaw
Defendant Commissioner of Social Security (Commissioner) requests, pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), that this action be reversed and remanded to the Commissioner for the following reasons: On remand, the Administrative Law Judge will be instructed to offer the claimant an opportunity for a hearing, obtain additional vocational expert testimony, and issue a new decision. (Motion, Dkt. 14.) Plaintiff has no objection to the requested relief. (Id.) Pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), the court has the “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.” 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). When a case is remanded under sentence four of § 405(g), the district court’s jurisdiction over the plaintiff’s case is terminated. Jackson v. Chater, 99 F. 3d 1086, 1095 (11th Cir. 1996); Sullivan v. Finkelstein, 496 U.S. 617, 625 (1990) (finding that a district court’s order remanding under sentence four of § 405(g) “terminated the civil action challenging the Secretary’s final determination that respondent was not entitled to benefits”).
“Immediate entry of judgment (as opposed to entry of judgment after postremand agency proceedings have been completed and their results filed with the court) is in fact the principal feature that distinguishes a sentence-four remand from a sentencesix remand.” Shalala v. Schaefer, 509 U.S. 292, 297 (1993). A remand under sentence four of § 405(g) “is based upon a determination that the Commissioner erred in some respect in reaching the decision to deny benefits.” Jackson, 99 F. 3d at 1095. Here, the Commissioner concedes error by requesting a reversal of the Commissioner’s decision. Accordingly:
1. The Commissioner’s Unopposed Motion for Entry of Judgment with Remand (Dkt. 14) is GRANTED. 2. The Commissioner’s decision denying Plaintiff’s application for Social Security benefits is REVERSED. 3. The case is REMANDED to the Commissioner pursuant to
sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for further administrative proceedings consistent with the reasons stated in the Commissioner’s Unopposed Motion for Entry of Judgment with Remand (Dkt. 14) and herein. 4. The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment in Plaintiff's favor, terminate all other pending motions, and close this case. ORDERED in Tampa, Florida, on March 13, 2023.
JUEIE $. SNEED
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Copies furnished to: Counsel of Record
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Shalala v. Schaefer, 509 U.S. 292 (U.S. 1993)
- Sullivan v. Finkelstein, 496 U.S. 617 (U.S. 1990)
- Jackson v. Chater, 99 F.3d 1086 (11th Cir. 1996)