Lanham v. Comm'r, Soc. Sec. Admin.

Full title: RAVEN LANHAM v. COMMISSIONER, SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION

Court: United States District Court, E.D. Texas, Tyler Division

Date published: Feb 14, 2024

Civil Action 6:23cv513-JDK (E.D. Tex. Feb. 14, 2024)

Opinion

Civil Action 6:23cv513-JDK

02-14-2024

RAVEN LANHAM v. COMMISSIONER, SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION

K. NICOLE MITCHELL UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

K. NICOLE MITCHELL UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Plaintiff initiated this lawsuit by filing a complaint seeking judicial review of the Commissioner's unfavorable decision concerning her entitlement to supplemental security income and child disability benefits. The case is referred to the undersigned pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636. The Commissioner filed an Unopposed Motion to Remand (ECF 9).

The Commissioner's motion seeks a remand for further administrative proceedings pursuant to the fourth sentence of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), which states:

The court shall have the 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.

The Commissioner asserts that further review of Plaintiff's case resulted in a determination that a remand for further administrative proceedings is warranted. The Commissioner asserts that Plaintiff does not oppose the requested relief.

RECOMMENDATION

It is hereby RECOMMENDED that the Unopposed Motion to Remand for Further Administrative Proceedings Pursuant to Sentence Four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) (ECF 9) be GRANTED. The Commissioner's final administrative decision should be REVERSED and the matter REMANDED to the Commissioner for further administrative proceedings pursuant to the fourth sentence of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).

Within fourteen days after receipt of the magistrate judge's report, any party may serve and file written objections to the findings and recommendations of the magistrate judge. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b).

A party's failure to file written objections to the findings, conclusions and recommendations contained in this Report within fourteen days after service shall bar that party from de novo review by the district judge of those findings, conclusions and recommendations and, except upon grounds of plain error, from attacking on appeal the unobjected-to proposed factual findings and legal conclusions accepted and adopted by the district court. Douglass v. United Servs. Auto. Assn., 79 F.3d 1415, 1430 (5^th Cir.1996) (en banc), superseded by statute on other grounds, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (extending the time to file objections from ten to fourteen days).

So ORDERED