Miller v. Saul
- Andrew Carter
- 1:21-cv-01686
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Miller v. Saul, Judge Carter dismissed the Social Security case with prejudice after a fully favorable administrative decision on remand.
Diane L. Miller, whose Social Security disability case was closed after the Commissioner issued a fully favorable decision on remand.
What happened
In Miller v. Saul, the court had previously sent Diane L. Miller’s disability case back to the Social Security Commissioner for further proceedings while keeping jurisdiction over the case. The agency later issued a decision finding her disabled as of August 4, 2017, the alleged disability-onset date.
The court reopened the case to resolve its remaining jurisdiction under the law governing this type of remand. Because the administrative proceedings had ended with a decision fully favorable to Miller, the court ordered that the action be dismissed with prejudice and directed the Clerk to enter judgment.
Judge Andrew Carter signed the December 2, 2024 order. The order did not describe any further dispute about Miller’s entitlement to disability benefits; it closed the federal case after the favorable agency decision.
The detailed version
- Miller v. Saul · No. 1:21-cv-01686
- Andrew Carter
- Dec. 2, 2024
Background
The court stated that it had remanded the case to the Commissioner of Social Security on August 18, 2021, for further administrative proceedings. The court retained jurisdiction under sentence six of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), a provision governing certain Social Security remands.
The administrative proceedings on remand ended with an April 4, 2022 decision that was fully favorable to Diane L. Miller. The decision found her disabled as of August 4, 2017, which the order identifies as her alleged onset date of disability.
Ruling
The court found it appropriate to reopen the case to resolve its remaining jurisdiction over the sentence-six remand. It ordered that the action be dismissed with prejudice and directed the Clerk to enter judgment. The order cited Shalala v. Schaefer, 509 U.S. 292 (1993).
Effect
The federal action was closed after the Commissioner issued the fully favorable decision on remand. The opinion does not state any additional benefits calculation or payment amount.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.