Alzate v. Social Security Administration Commissioner, No. 2:2015cv02150 - Document 11 (W.D. Ark. 2015)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Honorable Mark E. Ford on October 7, 2015. (hnc)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Alzate v. Social Security Administration Commissioner Doc. 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS FORT SMITH DIVISION AUTUMN K. ALZATE v. PLAINTIFF CIVIL NO. 2:15-cv-2150-MEF CAROLYN COLVIN, Commissioner Social Security Administration DEFENDANT MEMORAMDUM OPINION Plaintiff, Autumn Alzate, filed this action on July 31, 2015, seeking judicial review of a decision of the Commissioner of Social Security (Commissioner) pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). ECF No. 1. On October 6, 2015, in lieu of an answer, the Defendant filed an Unopposed Motion to Remand pursuant to sentence six of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). ECF. No. 10. On April 15, 2013, and September 16, 2013, respectively, Plaintiff filed applications for a period of disability, disability benefits (“DIB”), and supplemental security income (“SSI”) pursuant to Titles II and XVI of the Social Security Act, alleging disability since March 1, 2012. ECF No. 1. An Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) issued an unfavorable decision on August 6, 2014. The Defendants seek voluntary remand of this case pursuant to sentence 6 of sections 205(g) and 1631(c)(3) because the Plaintiff presented new material and medical evidence to the Appeals Council that did not exist at the time of the ALJ’s decision. On remand, the Defendants contend that the Appeals Council will instruct the ALJ to consider the new evidence; update the record as needed; evaluate the severity, onset, and limiting effects of the Plaintiff’s impairments; reevaluate the opinion evidence and the Plaintiff’s subjective complaints; reassess the Plaintiff’s residual functional capacity; and, proceed through the sequential process as necessary. Dockets.Justia.com This court may remand a social security case pursuant to sentence six of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) when the Commissioner, for good cause, requests remand to take further administrative action before filing an answer to the complaint. 42 U.S.C. § 405(g); Shalala v. Schaefer, 509 U.S. 292, 113 S.Ct. 2625 (1993). In the present case, the Defendants have not yet filed an answer, and we find good cause exists to support their request for remand. Based on the foregoing, we hereby grant the Defendants’ motion and remand this case to the Commissioner for further administrative action pursuant to sentence six of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). In view of the lengthy administrative proceedings Plaintiff has already completed, we direct that the Defendant expedite the administrative proceedings on remand. DATED this7th day of October, 2015. /s/ Mark E. Ford HON. MARK E. FORD UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
