Opinion
Civil Action 00-0623-BH-M
March 2, 2001
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
In this action under 42 U.S.C. § 405 (g), Plaintiff seeks judicial review of an adverse social security ruling which denied a claim for disability insurance benefits (Doc. 1). Defendant has filed a Motion for Entry of Judgment Under Sentence Four of 42 U.S.C. § 405 (g) with Remand of the Cause to the Defendant (Doc. 16). Defendant has stated that Plaintiff's attorney has no objection to the motion (Doc. 16, p. 1)
Defendant states that "remand would be appropriate to provide the Appeals Council time to vacate the May 11, 2000, action taken on the claimant's request for review. The Appeals Council will consider the claimant's brief in deciding whether the request for review should be granted" (Doc. 16, p. 1). This is a tacit admission that Plaintiff's application was not appropriately considered and that this action should be reversed. Without reviewing the substantive evidence of record, this Court accepts Defendant's acknowledgment of error.
It appears to the Court that the decision of the Secretary should be reversed and remanded. Such remand comes under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405 (g). See Melkonyan v. Sullivan, 501 U.S. 89 (1991). For further procedures not inconsistent with this report, see Shalala v. Schaefer, 509, U.S. 292 (1993).
Therefore, it is recommended, without objection from Plaintiff, that Defendant's motion to remand under sentence four be granted, that the Court enter a judgment reversing the decision of the Commissioner, and that this action be reversed and remanded to the Social Security Administration for further administrative proceedings not inconsistent with the orders of this Court.