Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-arwd-5_06-cv-05047/USCOURTS-arwd-5_06-cv-05047-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 865
Nature of Suit: Social Security - RSI (405(g))
Cause of Action: 42:405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWW)

---

AO72A

(Rev. 8/82)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS

FAYETTEVILLE DIVISION

SUSAN BROWN PLAINTIFF

v. CIVIL NO. 06-5047

JO ANNE B. BARNHART, Commissioner

Social Security Administration DEFENDANT

MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Plaintiff Susan Brown brings this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) seeking judicial

review of a decision of the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration (Commissioner)

denying her application for period of disability and disability insurance benefits (DIB) under the

provisions of Title II of the Social Security Act (Act). (Doc. # 1). The defendant filed an

answer to plaintiff's action on May 5, 2006, asserting that the findings of the Commissioner were

supported by substantial evidence and were conclusive. (Doc. # 3). 

On June 30, 2006, the Commissioner, having changed positions, filed a motion

requesting that plaintiff's case be remanded pursuant to "sentence four" of section 405(g) in order

to conduct further administrative proceedings. (Doc. # 6). The defendant states that upon

remand, the ALJ will be instructed to offer plaintiff another hearing, evaluate plaintiff’s

subjective complaints and set forth and evaluate the relevant credibility factors under Polaski v.

Heckler, 739 F.2d 1320, 1322 (8 Cir. 1984). th

The exclusive methods by which a district court may remand a social security case to the

Commissioner are set forth in "sentence four" and "sentence six" of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). A

remand pursuant to "sentence six" is limited to two situations: where the Commissioner requests

Case 5:06-cv-05047-JLH Document 7 Filed 07/24/06 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: <pageID>
AO72A

(Rev. 8/82)

2

a remand before answering the complaint, or where the court orders the Commissioner to

consider new, material evidence that was for good cause not presented before the agency. The

Fourth sentence of the statute provides that "[t]he court shall have power to enter, upon the

pleadings and transcript of the record, a judgment affirming, modifying, or reversing the decision

of the Commissioner of Social Security, with or without remanding the cause for a rehearing."

42 U.S.C. § 405(g); Shalala v. Schaefer, 509 U.S. 292, 296, 113 S.Ct. 2625 (1993).

Here, we find remand for the purpose of the ALJ to further evaluate the evidence as

addressed above, appropriate. 

Based on the foregoing, we recommend granting the Commissioner's motion to reverse

the decision of the ALJ and remand this case to the Commissioner for further administrative

action pursuant to "sentence four" of section 405(g). The parties have ten days from receipt

of our report and recommendation in which to file written objections pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

§ 636(b)(1). The failure to file timely objections may result in waiver of the right to appeal

questions of fact. The parties are reminded that objections must be both timely and

specific to trigger de novo review by the district court.

DATED this 24 day of July 2006. TH

/s/ Beverly Stites Jones 

HON. BEVERLY STITES JONES

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 5:06-cv-05047-JLH Document 7 Filed 07/24/06 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: <pageID>