Medlock v. Social Security Administration Commissioner, No. 2:2021cv02039 - Document 20 (W.D. Ark. 2021)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER. Signed by Honorable Mark E. Ford on October 20, 2021. (lw)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Medlock v. Social Security Administration Commissioner Doc. 20 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS FORT SMITH DIVISION ALEXA MEDLOCK PLAINTIFF v. CIVIL NO. 2:21-cv-2039-MEF KILOLO KIJAKAZI1, Acting Commissioner, Social Security Administration DEFENDANT MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Sondra Wilson, Plaintiff, brings this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) seeking judicial review of a decision of the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration (“Commissioner”) denying her applications for disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income. (ECF No. 2). This matter is before the undersigned by consent of the parties. (ECF No. 5). The Commissioner filed an answer to Plaintiff’s action on July 7, 2021, asserting that the findings of the Commissioner were supported by substantial evidence and were conclusive. (ECF No. 12). On October 12, 2021, having changed positions, the Commissioner filed an unopposed motion requesting that Plaintiff’s case be remanded pursuant to “sentence four” of section 405(g) to allow further administrative proceedings. (ECF No. 19). The exclusive methods by which a district court may remand a social security case to the Commissioner are set forth in “sentence four” and “sentence six” of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). A remand pursuant to “sentence six” is limited to two situations: where the Commissioner requests a remand before answering the complaint, or where the court orders the Commissioner to consider new, material evidence that was for good cause not presented before the agency. The Fourth sentence Kilolo Kijakazi became Acting Commissioner of the Social Security Administration on July 9, 2021. Pursuant to Rule 25(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Kilolo Kijakazi should be substituted as the defendant in this suit. No further action needs to be taken to continue this suit by reason of the last sentence of section 205(g) of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). 1 Dockets.Justia.com of the statute provides that “[t]he court shall have power 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.” 42 U.S.C. § 405(g); Shalala v. Schaefer, 509 U.S. 292, 296 (1993). Here, we find remand is appropriate to allow the Defendant to conduct further administrative proceedings regarding this matter. Therefore, the Commissioner’s motion is GRANTED, and the case will be remanded to the Commissioner for further administrative action pursuant to “sentence four” of section 405(g). DATED this 20th day of October 2021. /s/ Mark E. Ford HON. MARK E. FORD 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.
