PACE v. ASTRUE

Filing 26

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION, It is RECOMMENDED that the court GRANT Defendant's motion to remand, doc 25 . That the court direct the Clerk to enter final judgment REVERSING the Commissioner's decision to deny benefits and REMANDING the application to the Commissioner for rehearing pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for the purposes stated in the motion. R&R flag set. Signed by MAGISTRATE JUDGE WILLIAM C SHERRILL, JR on 4/22/09. Internal deadline for referral to district judge if objections are not filed earlier: 5/20/2009. (pll)

Download PDF
Page 1 of 2 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TALLAHASSEE DIVISION GLENDA D. PACE, Plaintiff, vs. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner, Social Security Administration, Defendant. _____________________________/ REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION The Defendant has moved for entry of judgment pursuant to sentence four of section 205(g), 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) and remand of this cause to the Commissioner. Doc. 25. Plaintiff does not oppose a sentence four remand and the motion should be granted. A sentence four remand is discretionary, but requires that the court enter "a judgment affirming, modifying, or reversing the decision of the Commissioner." The proper option in this case is to reverse the Commissioner's decision and remand. Melkonyan v. Sullivan, 501 U.S. 89, 111 S.Ct. 2157, 115 L.Ed.2d 78 (1991). CASE NO. 4:08cv342-SPM/WCS Page 2 of 2 Accordingly, it is RECOMMENDED that: 1. The court GRANT Defendant's motion to remand, doc. 25. 2. The court DIRECT the Clerk to enter final judgment REVERSING the Commissioner's decision to deny benefits and REMANDING the application to the Commissioner for rehearing pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for the purposes stated in the motion. DONE AND ORDERED on April 22, 2009. S/ William C. Sherrill, Jr. WILLIAM C. SHERRILL, JR. UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE Case No. 4:08cv342-SPM/WCS

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?