Davis v. Social Security Administration Commissioner
MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Honorable Mark E. Ford on April 10, 2017. (mjm)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
FORT SMITH DIVISION
DAVID L. DAVIS
CIVIL NO. 2:16-cv-2210-MEF
NANCY A. BERRYHILL, Acting
Commissioner Social Security Administration1
David Davis, 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 applications 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. ECF
The Commissioner filed an answer to Plaintiff’s action on November 7, 2017, asserting
that the findings of the Commissioner were supported by substantial evidence and were conclusive.
ECF No. 12. On April 7, 2017, 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 No. 18.
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
before answering the complaint, or where the court orders the Commissioner to consider new,
Nancy A. Berryhill is now the Acting Commissioner of Social Security. Pursuant to Rule 25(d) of the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure, Nancy A. Berryhill should be substituted for Acting Commissioner Carolyn W. Colvin as
the defendant in this suit. No further action needs to be taken to continue this suit by reason of the last sentence of
section 205(g) of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).
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 (1993).
Here, we find remand is appropriate to allow the Defendants to conduct further
administrative proceedings regarding this matter. 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 10th day of April, 2017.
/s/ Mark E. Ford
HONORABLE MARK E. FORD
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?