Toth v. Social Security Administration Commissioner
MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Honorable Erin L. Setser on April 30, 2012. (rw)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
MICHAEL S. TOTH
MICHAEL J. ASTRUE,
Commissioner of the Social Security Administration
Plaintiff, Michael S. Toth, 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 a period of disability and disability insurance
benefits (DIB) and supplemental security income (SSI) benefits. (Doc. 1). The Defendant filed
an answer to Plaintiff's action on March 26, 2012, asserting that Plaintiff has not shown that an
award of benefits or a remand is warranted under section 205(g) of the Social Security Act, 42
U.S.C. §405(g). (Doc. 7).
On March 27, 2012, the transcript of the social security proceedings was filed. On April
12, 2012, the Commissioner, having changed positions, 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 “to obtain vocational expert testimony to determine the effect of
Plaintiff’s manipulative limitations on the sedentary occupational base.” (Doc. 8 at p. 2). On
April 26, 2012, Plaintiff responded to Defendant’s motion, requesting that the Court grant
Defendant’s motion. (Doc. 9).
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, 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, the Court finds remand for the purpose of the ALJ to further evaluate the evidence
as addressed above appropriate.
Based on the foregoing, the Court finds remand appropriate and grants the
Commissioner's motion to remand this case to the Commissioner for further administrative
action pursuant to "sentence four" of section 405(g).
DATED this 30th day of April, 2012.
/s/ Erin L. Setser
HON. ERIN L. SETSER
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?