BITTNER
v.
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY
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.
In this Social Security benefits case, the district court granted the Commissioner's amended motion to remand the case to the Social Security Administration for further proceedings, including development of the record with medical and vocational expert testimony, reevaluation of residual functional capacity, and a new hearing before an Administrative Law Judge.
The court granted the Commissioner's amended motion to remand. The court reversed the Commissioner's decision and remanded the case to the SSA for further proceedings, entering judgment in the Plaintiff's favor consistent with the requirements of sentence four remands under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).
[1] A court may reverse a Commissioner's decision regarding social security benefits with or without remanding the cause for a rehearing.
[2] The failure of an Administrative Law Judge to develop the record constitutes sufficient grounds for remand.
Previewing 2 of 5 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“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."”
Establishes the court's statutory authority to remand Social Security cases under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g)
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePlaintiff Bittner filed suit challenging the Commissioner's denial of Social Security benefits. The Commissioner originally requested a remand but Pla…
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.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Action For Judicial Review Of Social Security Administration Decision cases and more on FLexlaw
Before the Court is Defendant Commissioner's amended unopposed motion to remand this action pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). (Doc. 26). [fn 2] According to the Commissioner, such a remand is necessary so:
the Appeals Council [can] instruct the Administrative Law Judge ... to further develop the record, including obtaining evidence from a medical expert, if available; further evaluate the [Plaintiff's] residual functional capacity; obtain evidence from a vocational expert; offer [the] Plaintiff the opportunity for a hearing; and issue a new decision.
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, 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 amended motion (Doc. 26) is granted.
2. The Commissioner's decision is reversed, and the case is remanded for further proceedings before the SSA 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 23rd day of April 2024.
Christopher P. Tuite
HONORABLE CHRISTOPHER P. TUITE
United States Magistrate Judge
Copies to: Counsel of record
[fn 1]: Mr. O'Malley became the Commissioner of Social Security on December 20, 2023. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 25(d), Mr. O'Malley is substituted for the former Acting Commissioner, Kilolo Kijakazi, as the Defendant in this suit.
[fn 2]: The Plaintiff opposed the Commissioner's original request for a remand because it did not include the opportunity for a hearing before the Social Security Administration (SSA), which the Commissioner has now agreed to allow. (Doc. 26 at 2-3).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Shalala v. Schaefer, 509 U.S. 292 (U.S. 1993)
- Jackson v. Chater, 99 F.3d 1086 (11th Cir. 1996)