Floyd v. Astrue(CONSENT)
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER that the Commissioner's 17 Unopposed Motion to Remand is GRANTED; the decision of the Commissioner is REVERSED and REMANDED for further proceedings pursuant to sentence four of 42 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), and for the reasons set forth in the Motion. A separate judgment will issue. Signed by Honorable Judge Wallace Capel, Jr. on 5/9/2013. Copies furnished to SSA Chief Judge and Social Security Administration. (dmn, )
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
FREDRIKA NICHELLE FLOYD,
CAROLYN W. COLVIN,
Commissioner of Social Security,
CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:12cv832-WC
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Pending before the Court is the Commissioner of Social Security’s Unopposed Motion
to Remand pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) and Rule 58 of the Federal Rules
of Civil Procedure. Def.’s Mot. To Remand (Doc. 17). The Commissioner states remand
is necessary to permit further consideration of Plaintiff’s claim of disability.
Commissioner further states that, upon this Court’s remand, the Appeals Council will direct
remand and will instruct the ALJ as follows:
(1) update the medical record;
(2) further evaluate Plaintiff’s work activity during the period-at-issue to
determine if she performed substantial gainful activity;
(3) further evaluate Plaintiff’s mental impairments;
(4) further evaluate the opinion evidence of Drs. Gam and William;
(5) if necessary, obtain vocational expert testimony;
(6) offer Plaintiff the opportunity for a new hearing;
(7) and issue a new decision.
Def.’s Mot. to Remand (Doc. 17) at 1-2.
Sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) authorizes the district court to “enter, upon the
pleadings and transcript of the record, a judgement 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). The district court may remand a case to the Commissioner
for a rehearing if the court finds “either . . . the decision is not supported by substantial
evidence, or . . . the Commissioner or the ALJ incorrectly applied the law relevant to the
disability claim.” Jackson v. Chater, 99 F.3d 1086, 1092 (11th Cir. 1996); see Carril v.
Barnhart, 201 F. Supp. 2d 1190, 1192 (N.D. Ala. 2002) (reversing the Commissioner’s
decision and remanding the case for further proceedings, where the Commissioner’s decision
was not supported by substantial evidence).
In this case, the Court finds reversal and remand necessary as Defendant concedes
reconsideration and proper application of governing law and further development of the
record is appropriate.
Accordingly, upon consideration of the Unopposed Motion (Doc. 17), it is
ORDERED that the Commissioner’s Motion to Remand (Doc. 17) is GRANTED; the
decision of the Commissioner is REVERSED and REMANDED for further proceedings
pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), and for the reasons set forth in the Motion.
A separate judgment will issue.
DONE this 9th day of May, 2013.
/s/ Wallace Capel, Jr.
WALLACE CAPEL, JR.
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?