Opinions and documents
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SHAWNA M. H.,
Plaintiff,
Civil No. 2:25-CV-13222
v.
FRANK BISIGNANO, MAGISTRATE JUDGE STAFFORD
COMMISSIONER
OF SOCIAL SECURITY,
Defendant.
_____________________________________/
STIPULATION TO REMAND TO THE COMMISSIONER
The parties hereby jointly move the Court to reverse and remand this case
for further proceedings, pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), and enter
judgment in favor of Plaintiff.
Should the Court grant the joint motion to remand, per the Sixth Circuit’s
recent decision in Follen v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 167 F.4th 352, 2026 WL 381021
(6th Cir. 2026), it should articulate that it is reversing and remanding for further
administrative proceedings under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) and specify
the merits errors that ground it. The parties agree that this Court should enter
judgment reversing and remanding to the agency for further administrative
proceedings based on deficits in the ALJ’s consideration of vocational evidence.
On remand, the Appeals Council will instruct the ALJ to update the
administrative record, proceed though the sequential evaluation process, obtain
additional vocational evidence, applying the policy in effect at the time the new
decision is issued, offer the claimant the opportunity for a hearing, and issue a new
decision.
WHEREFORE, the parties request that this Court order remand of this case
pursuant to the fourth sentence of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) and enter judgment pursuant
to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 58.
Respectfully submitted,
JEROME F. GORGON, JR.
United States Attorney
/s/ Rachel Julis
Rachel Julis
Special Assistant United States Attorney
6401 Security Boulevard
Baltimore, MD 21235
312.596.1853
rachel.julis@ssa.gov1
1 Of Counsel: Zak Toomey, Assistant United States Attorney, 211 Fort Street,
Suite 2001, Detroit, MI 48226, MO 61618.
/s/ Lisa M. Watkinson2
Lisa M. Watkinson
18831 West 12 Mile Road
Lathrup Village, MI 48076
248.767.5511
lwatkinson@lawfirmofbernstein.com
/s/ David Chermol
David Chermol
Chermol & Fishman, LLC
11450 Bustleton Avenue
Philadelphia, PA 19116
215.464.7200
fdc@ssahelp.us
2 Signed with consent obtained by email by Special Assistant United States
Attorney Rachel Julis, received on May 8, 2026.
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on May 9, 2026, the foregoing document was
electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using the ECF system.
I further certify that the undersigned emailed an encrypted copy of the
document to Lisa M. Watkinson, lwatkinson@lawfirmofbernstein.com and David
Chermol, fdc@ssihelp.us.
/s/ Rachel Julis
Rachel Julis
Special Assistant United States Attorney
6401 Security Boulevard
Baltimore, MD 21235
312.596.1853
rachel.julis@ssa.gov
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SHAWNA M. H.,
Plaintiff,
Civil No. 2:25-CV-13222
v.
FRANK BISIGNANO, MAGISTRATE JUDGE STAFFORD
COMMISSIONER
OF SOCIAL SECURITY,
Defendant.
_____________________________________/
ORDER REMANDING CASE UNDER
SENTENCE FOUR PER PARTIES’ STIPULATION
The parties’ Stipulation to Remand to the Commissioner is granted,
and this case is reversed and remanded to the Commissioner for further
proceedings under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).
This Court hereby enters a judgment, reversing the Commissioner’s decision
under sentence four of section 205(g) of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C.
§ 405(g), with remand of the cause to the Commissioner for further administrative
proceedings. This case is being remanded on the merits to permit the
Administrative Law Judge to give further consideration to the vocational evidence.
On remand, the Appeals Council will instruct the ALJ to update the
administrative record, proceed though the sequential evaluation process, obtain
additional vocational evidence, applying the policy in effect at the time the new
decision is issued, offer the claimant the opportunity for a hearing, and issue a new
decision.
s/Elizabeth A. Stafford_________
Elizabeth A. Stafford
United States Magistrate Judge
Dated: May 12, 2026
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.