1 

 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

SAMUEL G.,1

Plaintiff, 

v. 

KILOLO KIJAKAZI, Acting 

Commissioner of Social Security,2

Defendant. 

Civil Action No. 

22-cv-2925-MAU 

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER 

Plaintiff Samuel G. (“Plaintiff”) seeks reversal of a decision by the Commissioner of the 

Social Security Administration, Kilolo Kijakazi (“Commissioner”), in which an Administrative 

Law Judge (“ALJ”) denied Plaintiff’s application for Supplemental Security Income. See ECF 

No. 1. Upon written consent of the parties, this case was referred to the undersigned for all 

purposes. See ECF No. 14; Mar. 14, 2023 Min. Order. 

 On May 8, 2023, Plaintiff moved for judgment of reversal. See ECF No. 17. On May 19, 

2023, the Commissioner filed an Unopposed Motion for Entry of Judgment with Remand Pursuant 

to Sentence Four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), seeking to remand this matter to the Social Security 

Administration for further administrative proceedings. See ECF No. 19. Plaintiff does not oppose 

1 Plaintiff’s name has been partially redacted in accordance with the recommendation of the 

Committee on Court Administration and Case Management of the Judicial Conference of the 

United States. See Memorandum from Hon. Wm. Terrell Hodges, Chair, Comm. on Ct. Admin. 

& Case Mgmt. to Chief Judges of the U.S. Cts. of Appeals, Chief Judges of the U.S. Cts., Clerks 

of the U.S. Cts. of Appeals, and Clerks of the U.S. Dist. Cts. (May 1, 2018), available at 

https://www.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/18-ap-c-suggestion_cacm_0.pdf (last visited June 6, 

2023). 

2

 Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 25(d), the current Defendant has been 

substituted in place of her predecessor. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 25(d). 
2 

Commissioner’s Motion. Id. Upon remand, the parties agree that the ALJ will (1) hold another 

hearing; and (2) issue a new decision. Id. 

 Under the fourth sentence of section 205(g) of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), 

the Court has 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 case for a hearing.” Shalala v. Schaefer, 509 U.S. 292, 296 n.1 (1993); see also Butler v. Saul, 

No. 20-1919 (RMM), 2021 WL 2366436 (D.D.C. June 9, 2021) (remanding case to the Social 

Security Administration upon an unopposed motion by the Commissioner). A “substantive ruling 

on the correctness of [the Commissioner’s] decision” is a “necessary prerequisite to a sentencefour remand.” Krishnan v. Barnhart, 328 F.3d 685, 692 (D.C. Cir. 2003) (citing Melkonyan v. 

Sullivan, 501 U.S. 89, 98-101 (1991)). 

 By filing its Unopposed Motion for Entry of Judgment with Remand in response to 

Plaintiff’s Motion, the Commissioner has effectively conceded Plaintiff’s arguments that the 

ALJ’s decision was incorrect. See e.g., Branham v. Kijakazi, Case No. 21-cv-2014-RMM, 2022 

WL 2528059 (D.D.C. July 7, 2022) (treating the Commissioner’s motion for remand in response 

to a motion for reversal as a concession of Plaintiff’s substantive arguments). Accordingly, having 

considered the parties’ submissions, the relevant case law and statutory provisions, and the record, 

the Court GRANTS the Commissioner’s Motion for Entry of Judgment with Remand. The final 

decision of the Commissioner is REVERSED, and this matter is REMANDED to the 

Commissioner for further proceedings pursuant to sentence four of Section 205(g) of the Social 

Security Act, 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). Further, given this Order granting the Commissioner’s Motion, 

the Court DENIES AS MOOT Plaintiff’s Motion for Judgment of Reversal. 

 The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case. 
3 

SO ORDERED. 

Date: June 7, 2023 ______________________________ 

 MOXILA A. UPADHYAYA 

 United States Magistrate Judge