The opinion of the court was delivered by: Proud, Magistrate Judge:
This matter is now before the Court on the Parties' Joint Stipulation to Remand. (Doc. 25). The parties ask the Court to remand the case for further administrative proceedings pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. §405(g).
Remand of a social security case can be ordered only on one of two grounds, that is, pursuant to sentence four or sentence six of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). A sentence four remand depends upon a finding of error, and is itself a final, appealable order. In contrast, a sentence six remand is for the purpose of receipt of new evidence, but does not determine whether the Commissioner's decision as rendered was correct. A sentence six remand is not an appealable order. See, Melkonyan v. Sullivan, 501 U.S. 89 (1991); Perlman v. Swiss Bank Corporation Comprehensive Disability Protection Plan, 195 F.3d 975, 978 (7th Cir. 1999).
Here, the Commissioner implicitly confesses error by asking for reversal with remand pursuant to sentence four.
The Court notes that Ms. Endicott filed her application for SSI benefits in February, 2009, and the ALJ issued his decision in February, 2011. (Tr. 10-19). Administrative remedies were not completed until September, 2011, when the Appeals Council denied review. (Tr. 1). While recognizing that the agency has a full docket, the Court urges the Commissioner to expedite this matter to the extent practicable.
For good cause shown, the Parties' Joint Stipulation to Remand (Doc. 25) is
The final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security denying Sylvia Endicott's application for social security benefits is REVERSED and REMANDED to the Commissioner for rehearing and reconsideration of the evidence, pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. §405(g).
The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment in favor of plaintiff. IT IS SO ORDERED.
CLIFFORD J. PROUD UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw ...