Haynes v. Social Security Administration Commissioner
Filing
13
MEMORANDUM OPINION granting 11 Motion to Remand. Signed by Honorable Mark E. Ford on July 6, 2015. (hnc) Modified on 7/6/2015 (hnc).
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
FORT SMITH DIVISION
MARK A. HAYNES
v.
PLAINTIFF
CIVIL NO. 14-2225
CAROLYN W. COLVIN1, Commissioner
Social Security Administration
DEFENDANT
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Mark Haynes (“Plaintiff”) brings this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) seeking judicial
review of a decision of the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration (Commissioner)
denying his application for disability insurance benefits (“DIB”) and supplemental security income
(“SSI”). ECF No. 1. This matter is presently before the undersigned by consent of the parties.
The Commissioner filed an answer to Plaintiff’s action on April 20, 2015, asserting that the
findings of the Commissioner were supported by substantial evidence and were conclusive. ECF
No. 8. On June 30, 2015, having changed positions, the Commissioner filed a motion requesting that
Plaintiff’s case be remanded pursuant to “sentence four” of section 405(g) in order to conduct further
administrative proceedings. ECF Nos. 11, 12. Specifically, the Commissioner requests that remand
be granted to allow the ALJ to resolve the existing conflicts between the vocational expert’s
testimony and the Dictionary of Occupational Titles.
The exclusive methods by which a district court may remand a social security case to the
Commissioner are set forth in “sentence four” and “sentence six” of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). A remand
pursuant to “sentence six” is limited to two situations: where the Commissioner requests a remand
1
Carolyn W. Colvin became the Social Security Commissioner on February 14, 2013. Pursuant to Rule
25(d)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Carolyn W. Colvin has been substituted for Commissioner Michael
J. Astrue as the defendant in this suit.
before answering the complaint, or where the court orders the Commissioner to consider new,
material evidence that was for good cause not presented before the agency. The Fourth sentence of
the statute provides that “[t]he 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.” 42 U.S.C. § 405(g); Shalala v.
Schaefer, 509 U.S. 292, 296, 113 S.Ct. 2625 (1993).
Here, we find remand is appropriate to allow the ALJ to further evaluate the evidence as
addressed above. Therefore, the Commissioner’s motion to remand is hereby GRANTED and the
case remanded to the Commissioner for further administrative action pursuant to “sentence four” of
section 405(g).
DATED this 6th day of July, 2015.
/s/ Mark E. Ford
HONORABLE MARK E. FORD
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
2
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?