Rhodes v. Astrue (CONSENT)
OPINION AND ORDER that the dft's 13 Motion to Remand be and is hereby GRANTED; further ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the decision of the Commissioner be and is hereby REVERSED and this case be and is hereby REMANDED to the Commissioner for further proceedings; ORDERED that the plf shall have ninety (90) days after she receives notice of any amount of past due benefits awarded to seek attorney's fees under 42 USC § 406(b). Signed by Honorable Judge Charles S. Coody on 1/19/2012. Copies mailed to SSA Chief Judge and SSA Office of Hearings and Appeals. (wcl, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
ELOISE T. RHODES,
MICHAEL J. ASTRUE,
Commissioner of Social Security,
CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:11cv558-CSC
OPINION and ORDER
On January 19, 2012, the defendant filed a motion to reverse and remand for further
proceedings pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). See Doc. # 13. The plaintiff
does not object to a remand. In addition, the parties have consented to entry of final judgment
by the United States Magistrate Judge. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). Accordingly, it is
ORDERED that the defendant’s motion to remand (doc. # 13) be and is hereby
GRANTED. It is further
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the decision of the Commissioner be and is hereby
REVERSED and this case be and is hereby REMANDED to the Commissioner for further
proceedings. Finally, it is
ORDERED that, in accordance with Bergen v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 454 F.3d 1273,
1278 fn. 2 (11th Cir. 2006), the plaintiff shall have ninety (90) days after she receives notice
of any amount of past due benefits awarded to seek attorney’s fees under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b).
See also Blitch v. Astrue, 261 Fed. Appx. 241, 242 fn.1 (11th Cir. 2008).
A separate order will be entered.
Done this day of 19th day of January 2012.
/s/Charles S. Coody
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?