Lopez v. Bisignano

OCR transcription for search; preserved printed pages are authoritative

Case 7:26-cv-00011 Document 14 Filed 04/22/26 in TXSD_ Page 1,0f 3 .
United States District Court United States District Court

Southern District of Texas Southem District of Texas
FLED ENTERED
APR 22 2026 °") UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT ~ April 22, 2026

“$3 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS Nathan Ochsner, Clerk

Nathan Ochsner, Clerk =

ferk MCALLEN DIVISION
LEANDRA LOPEZ,
Plaintiff,
vs. ACTION NO. 7:26-CV-0011

FRANK BISIGNANO, Commissioner of
the Social Security Administration,

Defendant.

BLN Le LN LP M2 LP? G2 LI

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

This action by Plaintiff LEANDRA LOPEZ under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for the review of a
final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security has been referred to the undersigned
Magistrate Judge for consideration pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). On April 9, 2026, the
| Commissioner answered the complaint by submitting a copy of the transcript of the administrative
proceedings. (Dkt. Nos. 9, 10, 11). Soon thereafter, however, the Commissioner filed a Motion
to Remand (the “Motion”) (Dkt. No. 13), which is now pending. Through the Motion, the
Commissioner requests that the final administrative decision be reversed and that this case be
remanded pursuant to the fourth sentence of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) so that the Administrative Law
Judge may provide Plaintiff the opportunity for a new hearing, take further action to complete the
administrative record, and issue a new decision. (/d. at 1-3). Plaintiffis unopposed. (Id. at 4).

Two kinds of remands are recognized by 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), specifically, a fourth sentence
remand and a sixth sentence remand. Melkonyan v. Sullivan, 501 US. 89, 97-98 (1991). Under
the fourth sentence of § 405(g), a court may affirm, modify, or reverse the decision of the
Commissioner, with or without remanding the case for rehearing. Jd. A fourth sentence remand

is appropriate where the Commissioner has failed to develop the administrative record fully or to

1/3

AUTHENTICATED
U.S. GOVERNMENT
INFORMATION

GPO

Case 7:26-cv-00011 Document14_ Filed 04/22/26 in TXSD Page 2of3

provide a full and fair hearing. Judge v. Astrue, 2011 WL 1810468, at *2 (E.D.N.Y. May 10,
2011) (citing Melkonyan, 501 U.S. at 98). Sentence four states that a remand order may be entered
“upon the pleadings and transcript of the administrative record. 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). A sixth
sentence remand, on the other hand, applies either (1) on motion of the Commissioner made for
good cause before the Commissioner has filed an answer, or (2) where the district court learns of
evidence not in existence or available at the time of the administrative proceeding that might have
changed the proceeding’s outcome. Sullivan v. Finkelstein, 496 U.S. 617, 626 (1990); Fisher v.
Kijakazi, 2023 WL 5939886, at *1 (S.D. Tex. Sept. 12, 2023). Given the present circumstances,
a fourth sentence remand is seemingly appropriate.

For these reasons, the Magistrate Judge RECOMMENDS that the Motion (Dkt. No. 13) be
GRANTED, such that the final decision of the Commissioner should be REVERSED and this case
REMANDED for further administrative action. |

Notice to the Parties

Within fourteen (14) days after being served a copy of this report, a party may serve and
file specific, written obj ections to the proposed recommendations. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); Fed.
R. Civ. P. 72(b). Failure to file written objections within fourteen (14) days after service shall bar

an aggrieved party from de novo review by the court on an issue covered in this report and from
appellate review of factual findings accepted or adopted by the court, except on grounds of clear
error or manifest injustice.
Directive to Clerk of Court
The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to forward a copy of this report to the parties by any

receipted means.

2/3

Case 7:26-cv-00011 Document14_ Filed 04/22/26 in TXSD Page 3of3

DONE at McAllen, Texas this 22nd day of April 2026.

J T CKER
ted States Magistrate Judge

3/3