Vanhassel v. Commissioner of Social Security ( 2023 )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA ASHEVILLE DIVISION 1:22-cv-00233-WCM RAINER VANHASSEL, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ORDER ) v. ) ) COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL ) SECURITY, ) ) Defendant. ) _______________________________ ) This matter is before the Court on the following: 1. “Plaintiff’s Social Security Brief,” which has been filed as a Motion (Doc. 13); and 2. The Commissioner’s Consent Motion for Remand (the “Motion to Remand,” Doc. 18).1 Under Sentence Four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), a 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 any case 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. Docs. 10, 11. 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 the Court to remand the case for further administrative proceedings, and Plaintiff consents. Doc. 18 at 1. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT: 1. The Commissioner’s Consent Motion for Remand (Doc. 18) 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 Social Security Brief,” which has been filed as a Motion (Doc. 13), is DENIED AS MOOT. 3. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to enter a separate judgment of remand and to close this case. Signed: May 23, 2023 W. Carleton Metcalf py United States Magistrate Judge + AM J