DANIEL LUKENS
v.
FRANK BISIGNANO, COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY

M.D. Fla. | 2025-12-04
No. 8:25-cv-2045
District Court, M.D. Florida (2025) Caution

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.

Synopsis

In this Social Security appeal, the District Court granted the Commissioner's unopposed motion to remand the case under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) sentence four for a new hearing before an administrative law judge. The court reversed the Commissioner's prior decision and remanded for further proceedings consistent with proper procedure for sentence four remands.


Holding

The court granted the Commissioner's motion to remand. The court reversed the Commissioner's decision and remanded the case for further proceedings before the Social Security Administration. The court entered judgment in Lukens's favor as the appropriate procedure for a sentence four remand.


Headnotes

[1] A court may remand a Social Security case for a rehearing pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. …

[2] In a sentence four remand of a Social Security case, the appropriate procedure is for the court to enter a final judgment in the claimant's favor.

Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Key Quotes

“[QUOTE REDACTED — failed verbatim audit (paraphrase, not verbatim). See original_text for the text as originally displayed.]”

Establishes the required procedural mechanism for remands under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) sentence four.

Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

Daniel Lukens appealed a Social Security decision by the Commissioner. The Commissioner subsequently moved to remand the case to afford Lukens an oppo…

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.


Opinion of the Court

Before the Court is the Defendant Commissioner’s unopposed motion to remand this case pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). (Doc. 16). The Commissioner seeks this relief so that, on remand, “the administrative law judge will afford [the] Plaintiff the opportunity for a hearing.” Id. Sentence four of section 405(g) provides that a “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.” 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). In a sentence four remand,

Onnereley PA

HONORABLE CHRISTOPHER P. TUITE

United States Magistrate Judge Copies to: Counsel of record

Footnotes
1 Mr. Bisignano became the Commissioner of Social Security on May 6, 2025. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 25(d), Mr. Bisignano is substituted for the former Acting Commissioner, Mr. Leland Dudek, as the Defendant in this suit. the appropriate procedure is for a court to enter a final judgment in the claimant’s favor. Shalala v. Schaefer, 509 U.S. 292, 296-97 (1993); Jackson v. Chater, 99 F. 3d 1086, 1095 (11th Cir. 1996). In light of the above, it is hereby ORDERED: 1. The Commissioner’s motion (Doc. 16) is granted. 2. The Commissioner’s decision is reversed, and the case is remanded for further proceedings before the Social Security Administration consistent with this Order. 3. The Clerk of Court is directed to enter Judgment in the Plaintiff's favor, to terminate any pending motions, and to close the case. SO ORDERED in Tampa, Florida, this 4th day of December 2025.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw