Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-arwd-1_06-cv-01056/USCOURTS-arwd-1_06-cv-01056-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 863
Nature of Suit: Social Security - DIWC/DIWW (405(g))
Cause of Action: 42:405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)

---

AO72A

(Rev. 8/82)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS

EL DORADO DIVISION

YVETTE LEE o/b/o

JESSICA LEE PLAINTIFF

v. Civil No. 06-1056

JO ANNE B. BARNHART, 

Commissioner, Social 

Security Administration DEFENDANT

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

On June 1, 2006, the plaintiff herein filed her Complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g),

seeking judicial review of the denial of her applications for social security benefits (Doc. #1). 

Before filing her Answer, the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration (hereinafter

“Commissioner”), filed the Defendant’s Motion to Remand this matter for further

administrative action pursuant to sentence six, 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), dated August 2, 2006 (Doc.

#6). The plaintiff has not yet filed a Response to the instant motion. By Order entered on June

29, 2006, this matter was referred to the undersigned for the conduct of further proceedings and

the entry of judgment, in accordance with the consent of the parties (Doc. #5). 

The Commissioner seeks voluntary remand of this case because the audiotape of the

plaintiff’s administrative hearing held on November 1, 2005, is partially or totally blank (Doc.

#5, p. 2). 

Sentence six of § 205(g) of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), states in its

relevant part:

The court may, on motion of the Commissioner made for good cause shown

before he files his answer, remand the case to the Commissioner for further

action by the Commissioner...

Case 1:06-cv-01056-BES Document 7 Filed 08/22/06 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: <pageID>
AO72A

(Rev. 8/82)

-2-

See Melkonyan v. Sullivan, 501 U.S. 89, 101 n. 2 (1991); Shalala v. Schaefer, 113 S.Ct. 2625,

2629 n. 2 (1993). 

...[S]uch a situation is an example of what could be considered ‘good cause’ for

remand. Where, for example, the tape recording of the claimant’s oral

hearing is lost or inaudible or cannot otherwise be transcribed, or where

the claimant’s files cannot be located or are incomplete, good cause would

exist to remand the claim to the Commissioner for appropriate action to produce

a record. 

H.R.Rep.No. 96-944, 96 Cong., 2d Sess. 59 (1980). (emphasis added) th

The undersigned finds that good cause clearly exists. Thus, it is found that the

defendant’s motion has merit and should be granted, and this matter should be remanded,

pursuant to sentence six, 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) (Doc. #5). Accordingly, it is hereby considered,

ordered and adjudged that this matter be remanded to the Commissioner of the Social Security

Administration. Further, as set forth in her motion, it is noted that upon receipt of this

Order, the Appeals Council will remand this case to an Administrative Law Judge for a

de novo hearing within 90 days from said date.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 21 day of August, 2006. st

/s/ Bobby E. Shepherd 

HONORABLE BOBBY E. SHEPHERD 

 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:06-cv-01056-BES Document 7 Filed 08/22/06 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: <pageID>