IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA SOUTHERN DIVISION

MELONY WATSON, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No.: 1:20-cv-515-SMD ) ANDREW SAUL, ) Commissioner of Social Security, ) ) Defendant. )

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

On June 22, 2021, the Commissioner filed an Unopposed Motion for Entry of Judgment Under Sentence Four of

(g) with Reversal and Remand of the Cause to Defendant. Comm’r’s Mot. (Doc. 19). The Commissioner requests that the Court remand this case to the agency for further consideration and administrative action pursuant to sentence four of

(g).

. The Commissioner “believes remand is appropriate in this case so that an administrative law judge (ALJ) may further evaluate the case and issue a new administrative decision.”

The Commissioner states that, upon remand, “the Appeals Council will instruct the ALJ to seek supplemental vocational expert evidence to determine whether there are a significant number of jobs in the national economy that the claimant can perform; before relying on the vocational expert evidence, identify and resolve any conflicts between the occupational evidence provided by the vocational expert and the information in the Dictionary of Occupational Titles; and issue a new decision.”

Sentence four of

(g) authorizes the district court to “enter, upon the pleadings and transcript of the record, a judgment affirming, modifying, or reversing the decision of the Commissioner of Social Security, with or without remanding the cause for a rehearing.”

(g). The district court may remand a case to the Commissioner for a rehearing if the court finds “either . . . the decision is not supported by substantial

evidence, or . . . the Commissioner or the ALJ incorrectly applied the law relevant to the disability claim.” Jackson v. Chater,

(11th Cir. 1996). In this case, the Court finds reversal and remand necessary as Defendant concedes reconsideration and further administrative actions are necessary. Furthermore, Plaintiff does not oppose the motion. Accordingly, it is

ORDERED that the Commissioner’s Unopposed Motion for Entry of Judgment Under Sentence Four of

(g) (Doc. 19) is GRANTED. It is further ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the decision of the Commissioner is hereby REVERSED and this case be and is hereby REMANDED to the Commissioner for further proceedings. Finally, it is

ORDERED that, in accordance with Bergen v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec.,

, 1278 n.2 (11th Cir. 2006), Plaintiff shall have ninety (90) days after she receives notice of any amount of past due benefits awarded to seek attorney’s fees under 42 U.S.C.§ 406(b). See also Blitch v. Astrue,

, 241 n.1 (11th Cir. 2008).

2 Done this 22nd day of June, 2021.

Stephen M. Doyle CHIEF U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE

3