Burroughs v. Commissioner of Social Security
Filing
17
ORDER: Written Order attached. Entered by Magistrate Judge Jonathan E. Hawley on 9/8/2014. (KZ, ilcd)
E-FILED
Monday, 08 September, 2014 11:20:26 AM
Clerk, U.S. District Court, ILCD
IN THE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
ROCK ISLAND DIVISION
RAQUEL BURROUGHS,
Plaintiff,
v.
Case No. 4:13-cv-04026-JEH
CAROLYN W. COLVIN, ACTING
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL
SECURITY,
Defendant.
Order
This matter is now before the Court on the parties’ Stipulation for Remand
Under Sentence Four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) (Doc. 16). In their Stipulation, the
parties jointly request that the Court reverse this case and remand for further
proceedings pursuant to sentence four of 42 USC § 405(g), which authorizes the
Court “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 USC § 405(g).
The parties stipulate that upon remand, the Administrative Law Judge will be
directed to: 1) reevaluate the medical opinions of record, including those of the
State agency psychological consultants, and give reasons for the weight assigned;
2) reassess Ms. Burroughs’s residual functional capacity and subjective
complaints; and 3) if warranted, obtain supplemental evidence from a vocational
expert at step five.
The Court finds the request for remand appropriate and so the Stipulation
for Remand Under Sentence Four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) (Doc. 16) is GRANTED.
Accordingly, the Commissioner’s decision in this matter is REVERSED and the
1
case is REMANDED to the Commissioner for a new hearing pursuant to the
fourth sentence of 42 USC § 405(g). The Clerk’s Office is hereby directed to enter
Judgment in favor of the Plaintiff and against the Defendant. This matter is now
terminated.
Entered on September 8, 2014.
s/Jonathan E. Hawley
U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE
2
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?