Gibbons v. Astrue
Filing
12
ORDER OF REMAND IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the defendant's Motion for Remand is GRANTED. [Doc. 10] IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that pursuant to sentence six of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), this case is REMANDED to the Commissioner for further administrative proceedings, as set forth above. Terminate Case. Signed by Honorable Charles A. Shaw on 5/22/2012. (NCL)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION
REBECCA GIBBONS,
Plaintiff,
v.
MICHAEL J. ASTRUE,
Commissioner of Social Security,
Defendant.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
No. 4:12-CV-395 CAS
ORDER OF REMAND
This matter is before the Court on the defendant’s Motion for Remand. For the following
reasons, the motion will be granted.
In the Motion for Remand, defendant requests that this case be remanded to the
Commissioner for further administrative proceedings. Specifically, defendant states that significant
portions of the recording of the administrative hearing held on October 11, 2011 are inaudible and
therefore no transcription can be prepared of the hearing. Plaintiff states that she does not object to
the defendant’s motion. Defendant has not yet filed an Answer in this case. The Motion for
Remand is therefore timely filed and the defendant has shown good cause for such remand. See 42
U.S.C. § 405(g); Buckner v. Apfel, 213 F.3d 1006, 1010 (8th Cir. 2000). The case will be remanded
for a new administrative hearing and issuance of a new decision by the Administrative Law Judge.
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the defendant’s Motion for Remand is GRANTED. [Doc.
10]
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that pursuant to sentence six of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), this case
is REMANDED to the Commissioner for further administrative proceedings, as set forth above.1
__________________________________
CHARLES A. SHAW
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated this 22nd day of May, 2012.
1
It is the Commissioner’s duty to file with the district court the results of the proceedings upon
remand. 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).
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?