Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-alsd-2_14-cv-00437/USCOURTS-alsd-2_14-cv-00437-0/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)

---

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

VICKY GUNTER, *

 Plaintiff, * 

*

vs. * CIVIL ACTION NO. 14-00437-WS-B

*

 *

CAROLYN W. COLVIN, *

Commissioner of Social Security,*

 *

Defendant. *

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

This matter is before the Court on Defendant’s Unopposed 

Motion to Remand pursuant to “sentence four” of 42 U.S.C. §

405(g). (Doc. 16). This Motion has been referred to the 

undersigned for a report and recommendation pursuant to 28 

U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 72.2(c)(3). Upon 

consideration of all matters presented, the undersigned 

recommends that the cause be REMANDED to the Commissioner for a 

new determination.

A review of the pleadings in this case reveals that 

Plaintiff filed a complaint on September 18, 2014, alleging that 

the decision by the Administrative Law Judge (herein “the ALJ”) 

“that the Plaintiff is not disabled is not supported by 

substantial evidence on the record as a whole” and “is based 

upon errors of law.” (Doc. 1 at 3). In response, the 

Government filed an answer on December 18, 2014, denying 

Case 2:14-cv-00437-WS-B Document 17 Filed 04/02/15 Page 1 of 3
2

Plaintiff’s allegations in the complaint. (Doc. 10). However, 

in the instant motion, the Government states that this matter 

should be remanded to the Commissioner of Social Security for 

further administrative proceedings pursuant to sentence four of 

42 U.S.C. § 405(g) and that Plaintiff agrees. (Doc. 16). The 

Court finds that implicit in the Government’s request for remand 

is its acknowledgement that the administrative decision denying 

benefits should be reversed, and this matter remanded for 

further administrative proceedings pursuant to sentence four of 

42 U.S.C. § 405(g). 

Upon consideration of the foregoing, and the language of 

sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) empowering this Court “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,” the undersigned RECOMMENDS that the 

Defendant’s unopposed Motion to Remand be GRANTED, and that this 

Court enter judgment reversing and remanding this cause to the 

Commissioner for further administrative proceedings. 42 U.S.C. 

§ 405(g); Melkonyan v. Sullivan, 501 U.S. 89, 101 111 S. Ct. 

2157, 115 L. Ed. 2d 78 (1991).

Notice of Right to File Objections

A copy of this report and recommendation shall be served on 

all parties in the manner provided by law. Any party who 

Case 2:14-cv-00437-WS-B Document 17 Filed 04/02/15 Page 2 of 3
3

objects to this recommendation or anything in it must, within 

fourteen (14) days of the date of service of this document, file 

specific written objections with the Clerk of this Court. See

28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); S.D. Ala. L.R.

72.4. The parties should note that under Eleventh Circuit 

precedent, “the failure to object limits the scope of [] 

appellate review to plain error review of the magistrate judge’s 

factual findings.” Dupree v. Warden, Attorney General, State of 

Alabama, 715 F.3d 1295, 1300 (11th Cir. 2011). In order to be 

specific, an objection must identify the specific finding or 

recommendation to which objection is made, state the basis for 

the objection, and specify the place in the Magistrate Judge’s 

report and recommendation where the disputed determination is 

found. An objection that merely incorporates by reference or 

refers to the briefing before the Magistrate Judge is not 

specific.

DONE this 1st day of April, 2015.

 /s/ SONJA F. BIVINS 

 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:14-cv-00437-WS-B Document 17 Filed 04/02/15 Page 3 of 3