Duren v. Social Security Administration Commissioner
MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Honorable Barry A. Bryant on October 30, 2009. (cap)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS TEXARKANA DIVISION
LISA S. DUREN vs. Civil No. 4:09-cv-04091
MICHAEL J. ASTRUE Commissioner, Social Security Administration
MEMORANDUM OPINION On October 29, 2009, Defendant filed an Unopposed Motion for Remand. (Doc. No. 7). Plaintiff has no opposition to this Motion. (Doc. No. 7, Pg. 4). The parties have consented to the jurisdiction of a magistrate judge to conduct any and all proceedings in this case, including conducting the trial, ordering the entry of a final judgment, and conducting all post-judgment proceedings. (Doc. No. 5).1 Pursuant to this authority, the Court issues this memorandum opinion and orders the entry of a final judgment in this matter. 1. Background Defendant requests a remand for further administrative action pursuant to Sentence Six of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). Specifically, Defendant claims the following: The complaint states that there is newly discovered material evidence. The Office of Disability Adjudication and Review seeks remand in the subject case so that the Appeals Council can respond to Plaintiff's attorney request for reconsideration based on submission of additional evidence. (Doc. No. 4, Page 1).
The docket numbers for this case are referenced by the designation "Doc. No." The transcript pages for th is case are referenced by the designation "Tr."
2. Applicable Law Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), a court is authorized to remand a case to the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration ("Commissioner"). A court is authorized to remand such an action if three requirements are met: (1) the Commissioner made the motion for remand, (2) the motion was made prior to the time the Commissioner's answer was filed, and (3) the Commissioner established good cause for the remand. See id. 3. Discussion This Court finds all three requirements of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) are met and that this motion is well-taken and should be granted. First, the defendant is the Commissioner in this action, and the Commissioner filed this Motion to Remand. (Doc. No. 7). Second, Defendant made this motion prior to the time his answer was filed. See id. Third, the Commissioner has established good cause for this Motion to remand. This remand is necessary so that the Commissioner may respond to Plaintiff's attorney request for reconsideration based on submission of additional evidence. 4. Conclusion Based upon the forgoing, Defendant's Unopposed Motion To Remand is GRANTED, and this case is remanded to the Commissioner for further administrative action pursuant to sentence six of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). ENTERED this 30th day of October, 2009. /s/ Barry A. Bryant HON. BARRY A. BRYANT U.S. 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?