Shepherd v. Colvin (CONSENT), No. 2:2013cv00277 - Document 18 (M.D. Ala. 2013)

Court Description: OPINION AND ORDER that the defendant's Motion to 16 be and hereby is GRANTED; that the decision of the Commissioner be and is hereby REVERSED and this case be and is hereby REMANDED to the Commissioner for further proceedings; that, in accord ance with Bergen v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec., 454 F3d 1273, 1278 fn.2 (11th Cir. 2006), the plaintiff shall have ninety (90) days after she receives notice of any amount of past due benefits awarded to seek attorney's fees as further set out. Signed by Honorable Judge Terry F. Moorer on 11/1/2013. (jg, ) certified copy mailed to SSA Chief Judge; SSA Admin.

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA NORTHERN DIVISION SANDY JEAN SHEPHERD, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) CAROLYN W. COLVIN, ) Acting Commissioner of Social Security ) ) Defendant. ) CASE NO. 2:13-cv-277-TFM [wo] OPINION AND ORDER On October 31, 2013, the defendant filed an unopposed motion to reverse and remand for further proceedings pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) (Doc. 16). The plaintiff does not object to a remand. In addition, the parties have consented to entry of final judgment by the United States Magistrate Judge. See 28 U.S.C. 636 (c). Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the defendant s Motion to (Doc. 16) be and hereby is GRANTED. It is further ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the decision of the Commissioner be and is hereby REVERSED and this case be and is hereby REMANDED to the Commissioner for further proceedings. Finally, it is ORDERED that, in accordance with Bergen v. Comm r of Soc. Sec., 454 F3d 1273, 1278 fn.2 (11th Cir. 2006), the plaintiff shall have ninety (90) days after she receives notice of any amount of past due benefits awarded to seek attorney s fees under 42 U.S.C.§ 406(b). See also Blitch v. Astrue, 261 Fed. Appx. 241, 241 fn. 1 (11th Cir. 2008). DONE this 1st day of November, 2013. /s/ Terry F. Moorer TERRY F. MOORER UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 2

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.