Henderson v. Colvin

Filing 14

ORDER dismissing as moot 11 Motion for Summary Judgment; granting 13 Motion to Remand to Social Security. Signed by District Judge Robert J. Conrad, Jr on 1/26/17. (ssh)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
CHARLOTTE DIVISION
3:16-cv-00549-RJC
JONATHAN E. HENDERSON,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
CAROLYN W. COLVIN,
)
Acting Commissioner of
)
Social Security Administration,
)
)
Defendant.
)
__________________________________________ )

ORDER

THIS MATTER comes before the Court on Defendant’s Consent Motion for Reversal
and Remand Pursuant to Sentence Four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). (Doc. No. 13). Under sentence
four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), “[t]he court shall have the power to enter, upon the pleadings and
transcript of the record, a judgment affirming, modifying or reversing the decision of the
Commissioner, with or without remanding the cause for a rehearing.” See also Shalala v.
Schaefer, 509 U.S. 292, 296–97 (1993); Melkonyan v. Sullivan, 501 U.S. 89, 98 (1991).
Pursuant to the power of this Court to enter a judgment affirming, modifying, or
reversing the Commissioner’s decision with remand in Social Security actions under sentence
four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), and in light of Defendant’s request to remand this action for further
administrative proceedings, the Court hereby reverses the Commissioner’s decision under
sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) with a remand of the cause to the Commissioner for further
administrative proceedings, including a supplemental hearing.
Upon remand, the Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) shall hold a supplemental hearing;
take any action needed to complete the administrative record; obtain further vocational expert

testimony if necessary; and issue a new decision. The ALJ is directed to evaluate and explain
what weight is afforded to all opinions found in the record; evaluate anew Plaintiff’s
impairments in accordance with Social Security regulations; reevaluate whether Plaintiff’s
impairments meet a Listing; further consider Plaintiff’s residual functional capacity; further
evaluate Plaintiff’s subjective complaints; and address and resolve any apparent conflicts in the
record.
Because this matter is hereby remanded to the Commissioner, Plaintiff’s Motion for
Summary Judgment, (Doc. No. 11), is moot and shall be dismissed.
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED, for good cause shown, that:
1. Defendant’s Consent Motion for Reversal and Remand Pursuant to Sentence Four
of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), (Doc. No. 13), is GRANTED. The Court hereby
REVERSES the decision of the Commissioner and REMANDS this case for
further administrative proceedings.
2. Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment, (Doc. No. 11), is DISMISSED as
moot.
3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter a separate judgment pursuant to Federal
Rule of Civil Procedure 58 and to close this case.
Signed: January 26, 2017