Fred Edward Ross v. Frank Bisignano, Commissioner of Social Security Administration
Summary
Fred Edward Ross filed this action seeking judicial review of the Social Security Commissioner's denial of his disability benefits application under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). The Commissioner initially asserted the denial was supported by substantial evidence but subsequently changed positions, filing an unopposed motion requesting remand for further administrative proceedings. The court granted the unopposed motion and remanded the case to the Commissioner pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for additional administrative action.
About this source
GovPing monitors US District Court WDAR Docket Feed for new courts & legal regulatory changes. Every update since tracking began is archived, classified, and available as free RSS or email alerts — 3 changes logged to date.
What changed
The court granted the Commissioner's unopposed motion to remand, directing the case back to the Social Security Administration for further administrative proceedings pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). The court explained that a remand for further administrative proceedings constitutes a sentence four remand within the meaning of the statute, and that sentence six was inapplicable because the Commissioner had already filed an answer.
For disability benefits applicants and their representatives, this order represents a routine procedural development rather than a substantive ruling on the merits. The remand means the SSA will conduct additional administrative proceedings, potentially including new evidence or updated medical assessments, before any further judicial review can occur.
Archived snapshot
Apr 24, 2026GovPing captured this document from the original source. If the source has since changed or been removed, this is the text as it existed at that time.
Jump To
Top Caption Trial Court Document
Support FLP
CourtListener is a project of Free
Law Project, a federally-recognized 501(c)(3) non-profit. Members help support our work and get special access to features.
Please become a member today.
April 17, 2026 Get Citation Alerts Download PDF Add Note
Fred Edward Ross v. Frank Bisignano, Commissioner of Social Security Administration
District Court, W.D. Arkansas
- Citations: None known
- Docket Number: 6:25-cv-06117
Precedential Status: Unknown Status
Trial Court Document
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
HOT SPRINGS DIVISION
FRED EDWARD ROSS PLAINTIFF
v. CIVIL NO. 6:25-cv-06117-MEF
FRANK BISIGNANO, Commissioner1
Social Security Administration 0F DEFENDANT
MEMORANDUM OPINION
James Cornelison (“Plaintiff”) brings this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405 (g) seeking
judicial review of a decision of the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration (the
“Commissioner”) denying his application for disability benefits. (ECF No. 2). This matter is
presently before the undersigned by consent of the parties. (ECF No. 5).
In lieu of an answer, the Commissioner filed the Social Security Transcript on January 21,
2026, asserting that the findings of the Commissioner were supported by substantial evidence and
were conclusive. (ECF No. 6). See FED. R. CIV. P. SUPP SS RULE 4. On April 13, 2026, having
changed positions, the Commissioner filed an unopposed motion requesting that Plaintiff’s case
be remanded pursuant to “sentence four” of section 405(g) to conduct further administrative
proceedings. (ECF Nos. 11).
The exclusive methods by which a district court may remand a social security case to the
Commissioner are set forth in “sentence four” and “sentence six” of 42 U.S.C. § 405 (g). A remand
pursuant to “sentence six” is limited to two situations: where the Commissioner requests a remand
before answering the complaint, or where the court orders the Commissioner to consider new,
material evidence that was for good cause not presented before the agency. The Fourth sentence
1 Frank Bisignano was sworn in to serve as Commissioner of the Social Security Administration
on May 7, 2025, and in his official capacity is substituted as defendant. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 25(d).
of the statute provides that “[t]he court shall have power 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); Shalala
v. Schaefer, 509 U.S. 292, 296 (1993). The Supreme Court has held that a remand for further
administrative proceedings, such as the remand requested here, is a sentence four remand within
the meaning of 42 U.S.C. § 405 (g). See Melkonyan v. Sullivan, 501 U.S. 89, 99-100 (1991).
Accordingly, the Defendant’s Unopposed Motion to Remand is hereby granted, and the
case remanded to the Commissioner for further administrative action pursuant to “sentence four”
of section 405(g).
DATED this 17th day of April 2026.
/s/ Mark E. Ford
HON. MARK E. FORD
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Named provisions
Citations
Parties
Related changes
Get daily alerts for US District Court WDAR Docket Feed
Daily digest delivered to your inbox.
Free. Unsubscribe anytime.
About this page
Every important government, regulator, and court update from around the world. One place. Real-time. Free. Our mission
Source document text, dates, docket IDs, and authority are extracted directly from W.D. Arkansas.
The summary, classification, recommended actions, deadlines, and penalty information are AI-generated from the original text and may contain errors. Always verify against the source document.
Classification
Who this affects
Taxonomy
Browse Categories
Get alerts for this source
We'll email you when US District Court WDAR Docket Feed publishes new changes.
Subscribed!
Optional. Filters your digest to exactly the updates that matter to you.