Inman v. Commissioner of Social Security
ORDER granting 22 Motion to Remand to Social Security Administration. Signed by Judge David W. Dugan on 1/18/2023. (dsw)THIS TEXT ENTRY IS AN ORDER OF THE COURT. NO FURTHER DOCUMENTATION WILL BE MAILED.
Case 3:22-cv-01901-DWD Document 23 Filed 01/18/23 Page 1 of 2 Page ID #898
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
of Social Security,
Case No. 22-cv-1901-DWD
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
DUGAN, District Judge:
Before the Court is the parties’ Joint Stipulation to Remand to the Commissioner.
(Doc. 22). The parties ask that this case be remanded for further proceedings pursuant to
sentence four of section 205(g) of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). A sentence
four remand (as opposed to a sentence six remand) depends upon a finding of error, and
is itself a final, appealable order. See, Melkonyan v. Sullivan, 501 U.S. 89 (1991); Perlman v.
Swiss Bank Corporation Comprehensive Disability Protection Plan, 195 F.3d 975, 978 (7th Cir.
1999). Upon a sentence four remand, judgment should be entered in favor of plaintiff.
Shalala v. Schaefer, 509 U.S. 292, 302-303 (1993).
The parties agree that, “[o]n remand, the ALJ will proceed through the sequential
disability evaluation process and issue a new decision. If warranted, the ALJ will obtain
supplemental vocational expert testimony.” (Doc. 22, p. 1).
Case 3:22-cv-01901-DWD Document 23 Filed 01/18/23 Page 2 of 2 Page ID #899
For good cause shown, the parties’ Joint Stipulation to Remand to the
Commissioner (Doc. 22) is GRANTED.
The final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security denying Plaintiff’s
application for social security benefits is REVERSED and REMANDED to the
Commissioner for rehearing and reconsideration of the evidence, pursuant to sentence
four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).
The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to enter judgment in favor of Plaintiff.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: January 18, 2023
DAVID W. DUGAN
United States District 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?