Mierzwa v. Astrue
Filing
26
MOTION by Defendant Michael Astrue for judgment Defendant's motion to enter judgment (Hunt, LaShonda)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
EASTERN DIVISION
LORETTA A. MIERZWA,
Plaintiff,
v.
MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of
Social Security,
Defendant.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
No. 08 C 6390
Magistrate Judge Ashman
DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO ENTER JUDGMENT
NOW COMES Defendant, Michael J. Astrue, Commissioner of Social Security, and moves
this Honorable Court to enter judgment, following the conclusion of proceedings pursuant to the
Court’s remand under sentence six of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), as further explained below.
1.
On August 26, 2009, the court entered an order granting the parties’ stipulation for
remand under sentence six of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). (Dkt. 20.)
2.
The proceedings on remand have been concluded, and the Commissioner has awarded
Plaintiff continuing disability benefits beginning December 2006.
3.
As the Supreme Court has noted, “[i]mmediate entry of judgment (as opposed to entry
of judgment after postremand agency proceedings have been completed and their results filed with
the court) is in fact the principal feature that distinguishes a sentence-four remand from a
sentence-six remand.” Shalala v. Schaefer, 509 U.S. 292, 297 (1993).
4.
Plaintiff does not oppose this motion.
5.
Accordingly, the Commissioner respectfully moves the court to enter judgment
affirming the Commissioner’s decision.
Respectfully submitted,
GARY S. SHAPIRO
Acting United States Attorney
By: s/ LaShonda A. Hunt
LASHONDA A. HUNT
Assistant United States Attorney
219 South Dearborn Street
Chicago, Illinois 60604
(312) 886-4190
lashonda.hunt@usdoj.gov
Of Counsel:
GRACE M. KIM
Acting Regional Chief Counsel
Social Security Administration
CHARLES R. GOLDSTEIN
Special Assistant United States Attorney
Office of the General Counsel
200 W. Adams, Suite 3000
Chicago, Illinois 60606
(877) 800-7578
charles.goldstein@ssa.gov
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?