IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
EASTERN DIVISION
RICHARD C., )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Case No. 3:25-cv-566-SMD
)
FRANK BISIGNANO, )
Commissioner of Social Security,1 )
)
Defendant. )
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
On January 13, 2026, the Commissioner filed an Unopposed Motion for Entry of
Judgment with Remand. Comm’r’s Mot. (Doc. 14). The Commissioner requests that the
Court reverse the Commissioner’s decision and remand this case for further consideration
and administrative action pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). Id. p. 1.
Sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(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.” 42 U.S.C. § 405(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
1 Plaintiff’s complaint named Bisignano as “Acting” Commissioner of Social Security. Because Bisignano
is the Commissioner of Social Security, and not the Acting Commissioner, the Clerk of Court is
DIRECTED to restyle the case to reflect this distinction.
evidence, or. . . the Commissioner or the ALJ incorrectly applied the law relevant to the
disability claim.” Jackson v. Chater, 99 F.3d 1086, 1092 (11th Cir. 1996).
In this case, the Court finds reversal and remand necessary as the Commissioner
concedes reconsideration and further administrative actions are necessary. Further,
Plaintiff does not oppose the motion. Accordingly, it is
ORDERED that the Commissioner’s Unopposed Motion for Entry of Judgment
with Remand (Doc. 14) is GRANTED and that the decision of the Commissioner is hereby
REVERSED and REMANDED for further proceedings under sentence four of 42 U.S.C.
§ 405(g) consistent with the Commissioner’s motion. Further, it is
ORDERED that, in accordance with Bergen v. Comm of Soc. Sec., 454 F.3d 1273,
1278 n.2 (11th Cir. 2006), Plaintiff shall have ninety (90) days after he 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, 261 F. App’x 241, 241 n.1 (11th Cir. 2008).
A separate judgment will issue.
Done this 14th day of January, 2026.
Stephen Doyle
CHIEF U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Not legal advice. These patterns come from public court records, not ratings of judges as people. They may reflect the types of cases a judge handles, local procedures or other factors, and they do not account for the facts of any individual case. Past patterns do not predict future rulings. Records can be incomplete, months behind current activity, or matched to the wrong person; sealed and confidential cases are not included. Use this as one piece of information, never the sole basis for legal strategy or a recusal motion. Full disclaimer: https://judgefinder.io/legal/disclaimer Read the full disclaimer.