Barber v. Astrue

Filing 20

ORDER granting 18 Defendant's Motion for Entry of Judgment Under Sentence Four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) with Reversal and Remand of the Cause to the Defendant. This is not a Recommended Ruling. The parties have consented to the Magistrate J udge's entering a final order in this case without the need for entry of a recommended ruling and review by a District Judge. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 73(b). The Clerk is directed to enter a separate judgment in favor of Plaintiff in this matter under Rule 58(a), Fed. R. Civ. P., to remand this cause to the Commissioner for further administrative proceedings in accordance with this Order, and to close this case. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge William I. Garfinkel on 3/15/2012. (Smith, M.)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT

ANGELA M. BARBER,

:

Plaintiff,

:

vs.

:

MICHAEL J. ASTRUE,
Commissioner of Social Security Administration,

No. 3:11cv1158(MRK)(WIG)

:

:
Defendant.
---------------------------------------------------------------X

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR ENTRY OF JUDGMENT
WITH REVERSAL AND REMAND [DOC. # 18]
Defendant, Michael J. Astrue, Commissioner of the Social Security Administration, has
moved this Court to enter judgment with a reversal and remand of this cause to the
Commissioner. Counsel for Defendant represents that she has contacted Plaintiff’s counsel,
Michael J. Weisman, Esq., who consents to the relief sought in this motion.
Under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), the Court has the power to enter a judgment
with a reversal and remand of the cause to the Commissioner for further proceedings. See
Shalala v. Schaefer, 509 U.S. 292, 297 (1993); Melkonyan v. Sullivan, 501 U.S. 89, 98 (1991).
Remand for further development of the record is appropriate when gaps exist in the
administrative record or when the administrative law judge (“ALJ”) committed legal error. See
Parker v. Harris, 626 F.2d 225, 235 (2d Cir. 1980).
Here, the Commissioner has determined, and Plaintiff’s counsel concurs, that remand of
this case is necessary for further development of the record and additional administrative action.
1

Upon remand, the Appeals Council will remand this case to the ALJ for further proceedings.
The ALJ will obtain vocational expert evidence to assist in determining whether Plaintiff can
perform her past relevant work or other work that exists in substantial numbers in the national
economy. The ALJ will then issue a new decision.
Accordingly, the Court hereby GRANTS the Defendant’s Motion for Entry of Judgment
Under Sentence Four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) with Reversal and Remand of the Cause to the
Defendant [Doc. # 18]. This is not a Recommended Ruling. The parties have consented to the
Magistrate Judge’s entering a final order in this case without the need for entry of a
recommended ruling and review by a District Judge. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 73(b).
The Clerk is directed to enter a separate judgment in favor of Plaintiff in this matter under
Rule 58(a), Fed. R. Civ. P., to remand this cause to the Commissioner for further administrative
proceedings in accordance with this Order, and to close this case.
It is SO ORDERED, this

15th

day of March, 2012, at Bridgeport, Connecticut.
/s/ William I. Garfinkel
WILLIAM I. GARFINKEL
United States Magistrate Judge

2