Tropper v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration

Filing 18

ORDER granting 15 Motion to Remand. The Commissioner's final decision is reversed and remanded pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for further proceedings as set forth in the motion. Signed by Honorable Timothy M Cain on 5/23/2017.(abuc)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA GREENVILLE DIVISION Christopher Joseph Topper, Plaintiff, v. Nancy A. Berryhill, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Civil Action No. 6:16-3196-TMC ORDER The plaintiff, Christopher Joseph Topper (“Topper”), brought this action under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), seeking judicial review of a final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security (“Commissioner”)1 denying his claim for Disability Insurance benefits and Supplemental Security Income benefits under the Social Security Act. (ECF No. 1). Before the court is the Commissioner’s motion to remand (ECF No. 15) requesting that the Commissioner’s decision be reversed and the case remanded, pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), to the Commissioner for further administrative action as set forth in the motion. Plaintiff Topper consented to the remand. (ECF No. 15 at 2). Accordingly, the Commissioner’s motion to remand (ECF No. 15) is GRANTED, and the Commissioner’s final decision is reversed and remanded pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for further proceedings as set forth in the motion. IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Timothy M. Cain United States District Judge Anderson, South Carolina May 23, 2017 1 Nancy A. Berryhill became the Acting Commissioner of the Social Security Administration on January 27, 2017. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 25(d), Berryhill should be substituted for Carolyn W. Colvin as the defendant in this action.

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?