Glover v. Commissioner of Social Security

W.D. North Carolina

Glover v. Commissioner of Social Security

CourtDistrict Court, W.D. North Carolina

DecidedJuly 20, 2022

Docket3:21-cv-00613

StatusUnknown

This text of Glover v. Commissioner of Social Security (Glover v. Commissioner of Social Security) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, W.D. North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Glover v. Commissioner of Social Security, (W.D.N.C. 2022).

Pincite

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA CHARLOTTE DIVISION 3:21-cv-00613-WCM

SHEILA L. GLOVER, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ORDER ) COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL ) SECURITY, ) ) Defendant. ) _______________________________ )

This matter is before the court on the following: 1. Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 11); and 2. The Commissioner’s “Consent Motion for Reversal and Remand Pursuant to Sentence Four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g)” (the “Motion to Remand,” Doc. 13).1 Under Sentence Four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), the court has the authority “to enter, upon the pleadings and transcript of the record, a judgment affirming, modifying, or reversing the decision of the Commissioner, with or without remanding the cause for a rehearing.” See Shalala v. Schaefer, 509 U.S. 292, 299 (1993). Remand for further proceedings is the proper action in

1 The parties have consented for a United States Magistrate Judge to conduct any and all proceedings in this case, including entering a final judgment. Doc. 10. any case that requires further fact finding. See Meyer v. Astrue, 662 F.3d 700, 707 (4th Cir. 2011) (‘Assessing the probative value of competing evidence is quintessentially the role of the fact finder. We cannot undertake it in the first instance. Therefore, we must remand the case for further fact finding”). Here, the Commissioner asks this court to “reverse and remand the case to the Commissioner” for further administrative proceedings. Doc. 18 at 1. Plaintiff's counsel consents. Id. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT: 1. The Commissioner’s “Consent Motion for Reversal and Remand Pursuant to Sentence Four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g)” (Doc. 13) is GRANTED, the Commissioner’s decision is REVERSED, and this matter is REMANDED pursuant to Sentence Four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). 2. Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 11) is DENIED AS MOOT. 3. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to enter a separate judgment of remand, thereby closing the case.

Signed: July 20, 2022

W. Carleton Metcalf iy United States Magistrate Judge + AM J

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA CHARLOTTE DIVISION 3:21-cv-00613-WCM

SHEILA L. GLOVER, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ORDER ) COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL ) SECURITY, ) ) Defendant. ) _______________________________ )

This matter is before the court on the following: 1. Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 11); and 2. The Commissioner’s “Consent Motion for Reversal and Remand Pursuant to Sentence Four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g)” (the “Motion to Remand,” Doc. 13).1 Under Sentence Four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), the court has the authority “to enter, upon the pleadings and transcript of the record, a judgment affirming, modifying, or reversing the decision of the Commissioner, with or without remanding the cause for a rehearing.” See Shalala v. Schaefer, 509 U.S. 292, 299 (1993). Remand for further proceedings is the proper action in

1 The parties have consented for a United States Magistrate Judge to conduct any and all proceedings in this case, including entering a final judgment. Doc. 10. any case that requires further fact finding. See Meyer v. Astrue, 662 F.3d 700, 707 (4th Cir. 2011) (‘Assessing the probative value of competing evidence is quintessentially the role of the fact finder. We cannot undertake it in the first instance. Therefore, we must remand the case for further fact finding”). Here, the Commissioner asks this court to “reverse and remand the case to the Commissioner” for further administrative proceedings. Doc. 18 at 1. Plaintiff's counsel consents. Id. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT: 1. The Commissioner’s “Consent Motion for Reversal and Remand Pursuant to Sentence Four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g)” (Doc. 13) is GRANTED, the Commissioner’s decision is REVERSED, and this matter is REMANDED pursuant to Sentence Four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). 2. Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 11) is DENIED AS MOOT. 3. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to enter a separate judgment of remand, thereby closing the case.

Signed: July 20, 2022

W. Carleton Metcalf iy United States Magistrate Judge + AM J

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Glover v. Commissioner of Social Security, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/glover-v-commissioner-of-social-security-ncwd-2022.

Opinion

W. Carleton Metcalf iy United States Magistrate Judge + AM J

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack