Watson v. Astrue
ORDER granting 8 Motion to Remand case to the Commissioner for further action. Signed by District Judge Robert J. Conrad, Jr on 6/18/2013. (Pro se litigant served by US Mail.)(eef)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
TERESA L. WATSON,
CAROLYN W. COLVIN,1
Acting Commissioner of
Social Security Administration,
THIS MATTER comes before the Court on Defendant’s motion to remand this case to
the Commissioner for further action. (Doc. No. 8). Under sentence six of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g),
“[t]he court may, on motion of the Commissioner of Social Security made for good cause shown
before the Commissioner files the Commissioner's answer, remand the case to the Commissioner
of Social Security for further action by the Commissioner of Social Security.” See also
Melkonyan v. Sullivan, 501 U.S. 89, 101 n.2 (1991) (“Sentence six . . . authorizes the district
court to remand on motion by the Secretary made before the Secretary has filed a response in the
action.”); Shalala v. Schaefer, 509 U.S. 292, 305 n.2 (1993) (“Sentence-six remands may be
ordered in only two situations: where the Secretary requests a remand before answering the
complaint, or where new, material evidence is adduced that was for good cause not presented
before the agency.”).
The Commissioner contends that remand would be appropriate because “the Office of
Defendant filed the present action on October 22, 2012 to appeal Michael J. Astrue’s denial of
her social security claim. Carolyn W. Colvin became the Acting Commissioner of Social
Security on February 14, 2013. Pursuant to rule 25(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure,
Carolyn W. Colvin was substituted for Michael J. Astrue as the Defendant in this suit.
Hearings and Appeals is unable to locate the claims file of the Administrative Law Judge’s
decision, or the recording of the administrative hearing.” (Doc. No. 9 at 1). The Commissioner
states that on remand, “the Commissioner will return the claim to an Administrative Law Judge,
who will reconstruct the administrative record, and hold another hearing.” (Id.).
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED, for good cause shown, that Defendant’s Motion for
Remand, (Doc. No. 8), is GRANTED.
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?