Jones v. Social Security Administration Commissioner
MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Honorable Mark E. Ford on August 31, 2015. (rg)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
LINDA R. JONES
CIVIL NO. 3:14-cv-3123-MEF
CAROLYN W. COLVIN1, Commissioner
Social Security Administration
Linda Jones (“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 her application for supplemental security income (“SSI”). ECF No. 1. This matter is
presently before the undersigned by consent of the parties. ECF No. 7.
The Commissioner filed an answer to Plaintiff’s action on May 15, 2015, asserting that the
findings of the Commissioner were supported by substantial evidence and were conclusive. ECF
No. 9. On August 28, 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. 13. More specifically, the Commissioner requests
remand to allow the ALJ to reconsider all of the treating medical source evidence and opinions,
including those from other sources, pursuant to the provisions of 20 C.F.R. § 416.945 and Social
Security Rulings 96-2p and 96-5p; to provide appropriate rationale for the weight afforded such
opinion evidence; to recontact medical sources to clarify or obtain any additional evidence; and,
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.
to obtain testimony from a vocational expert to clarify the effect of the assessed limitations on the
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 (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 31st day of August, 2015.
/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?