United States District Court, S.D. Illinois
LINDLEY R. ELLIS, Plaintiff,
CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Defendant.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
CLIFFORD J. PROUD, Magistrate Judge.
This matter is now before the Court on the parties' Stipulation to Remand. (Doc. 30).
There are only two avenues for remanding a social security case. Remand can be ordered pursuant to sentence four or to 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 parties stipulate that this case should be remanded pursuant to sentence four. In accordance with Schaefer v. Shalala , 509 U.S. 292, 302-303 (1993), judgment will be entered in favor of plaintiff.
The Court notes that plaintiff applied for benefits in April, 2010, and the ALJ issued his decision in April, 2012. (Tr. 39-49). Administrative remedies were not completed until June, 2013, when the Appeals Council denied review. (Tr. 20). Plaintiff sought and received an extension in which to file a civil action. (Tr. 1). While recognizing that the agency has a full docket, the Court urges the Commissioner to expedite this matter on remand to the extent practicable.
For good cause shown, the parties' Stipulation to Remand (Doc. 30) is GRANTED.
The final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security denying Lindley R. Ellis' application for social security benefits is REVERSED and REMANDED to the Commissioner for rehearing and reconsideration of the evidence, pursuant to sentence four
The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment in ...